School Psychologists' Job Satisfaction: Ten Years Later

by

Travis G. Worrell

Dissertation submitted to the faculty of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in partial

fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

In

Counselor Education

APPROVED:

Thomas H. Hohenshil, Co-Chair Gary E. Skaggs, Co-Chair

Gerard F. Lawson Michael B. Brown

David Kirk

May, 2004 Blacksburg, Virginia Key words: Job

Satisfaction, School Psychologists

School Psychologists' Job Satisfaction: Ten Years Later

Travis G. Worrell

(ABSTRACT)

This study was designed to replicate nationwide surveys completed in 1982 and 1992. The

purpose was to examine and describe the levels of job satisfaction and the relationship between the

variables in a national sample of school psychologists belonging to the National Association of School
Psychologists (NASP). The sample for this study consisted of respondents who reported being full-time

school practitioners.

Data were collected through mailed survey packets including a data form and a modified version

of the 1977 Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ). Packets were mailed to 500 randomly selected

members of the National Association of School Psychologists. Of the 308 packets returned, 234 were

full-time school practitioners and were included in the analysis.

Results indicated that 90% of school psychologists were satisfied or very satisfied with their

jobs. The findings showed a gradual increase in overall job satisfaction when compared to the 85.7% in

1982 and the 86% in 1992 who reported being satisfied or very satisfied with their jobs. Participants in

the current sample were more satisfied with their job security, independence, and creativity. The only

variables demonstrating a significant relationship with job satisfaction were the intent to remain in

current position and supervisor certification.

Several recommendations and implications were drawn from the study. Trends in the field

relating to gender, psychologist-to-student ratio, salary, degree status, and numerous other factors were

discussed along with recommendations for future research.

The successful completion of this dissertation would not have been possible without the support

and cooperation of others. I must first thank God, who makes all things possible. I know that this project

was not my individual achievement, but the result of many people to whom I will be forever grateful. Of

those, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my wife Cindy, who has been my cheerleader since

high school. Her unwavering support through this process could never be fully articulated. Her role was

fundamental in the mailing and scoring of the survey materials, and she contributed countless hours to

the completion of this project. She is, and always will be my rock.

Special thanks to Tom Hohenshil, who has stuck with me from the beginning of this journey,

and always been there to share his expertise and guidance. I would also like to thank the other members

of my committee, Gary Skaggs, Gerard Lawson, Michael Brown, and David Kirk. Each of you has

assisted in the development and review of this project, and I am thankful to you all. I would also like to

express my sincere thanks to Vicki Meadows, program area secretary who was always available and

eager to lend a helping hand.

 I would also like to thank Martinsville City School System and my supervisor Dr. Joan

Montgomery for their on-going support and for being flexible with my work schedule while I attended

classes. A special thanks goes to Dr. Carol Merchant, my professional mentor who has helped me in so

many ways. I would also like to acknowledge assistant principal and pastor Zeb Talley for referring to

me as Dr. Worrell since I started this program. Your words encouraged me in more ways than one.
 I am also thankful to the members of the National Association of School Psychologists who took

time away from their busy schedules to answer and return a lengthy questionnaire.

Last, but certainly not least, I must thank my family. To my parents Gleason and Kay Worrell,

who have always taught me the importance of education and provided me with the financial support that

enabled me to continue in my post graduate studies at Radford University. And to my in-laws, Maynard

and Jeanette Wood, for always encouraging my education and providing support and confidence in my

ability to accomplish whatever I set out to do. To all of you, I am forever grateful.
TABLE OF CONTENTS

I............................................................................................................. INTRODUCTIO
N .......................................................................................................................1
Purpose of the Study........................................................................... 5
Definition of Terms............................................................................ 6
Limitations of the Study.................................................................... 7
Significance of the Study.................................................................. 7
II............................................................................................................ REVIEW OF
THE LITERATURE................................................................................................... 10
Definition of Job Satisfaction........................................................... 10
Theories of Job Satisfaction............................................................... 12
Content Theories................................................................. 12
Process Theories.................................................................. 14
Situational Theories............................................................. 15
Measurement of Job Satisfaction....................................................... 16
Job Satisfaction Survey........................................................ 16
Job Descriptive Index.......................................................... 17
Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire.................................. 17
Determinants of Job Satisfaction....................................................... 18
Demographic Variables....................................................... 18
Salary.................................................................................. 21
Rural Versus Urban Worksite.............................................. 22
Interpersonal Factors........................................................... 22
Intrinsic Factors................................................................... 24
Job Satisfaction in School Psychology............................................ 25
Overall Satisfaction Levels.................................................. 25
Demographic Variables....................................................... 26
Gender................................................................................. 26
Salary.................................................................................. 27
Supervision......................................................................... 27
Urban Versus Rural Worksite.............................................. 28
Professional Affiliation........................................................ 28
Caseload............................................................................... 28
Boundary Spanning Opportunities....................................... 29
Opportunities for Advancement........................................... 29
Role Diversity....................................................................... 30
System Policies and Practices.............................................. 31
Summary.......................................................................................... 31

III...........................................................................................................METHODOLO
GY .......................................................................................................................33
Research Questions............................................................................ 33
Participants......................................................................................... 34
Instrumentation.................................................................................. 34

4
 Data Collection Process..................................................................... 36
Pre-Letter............................................................................. 36
First mailing.......................................................................... 36
Postcard Reminder................................................................ 36
First Follow-up...................................................................... 36
Second Follow-up................................................................. 37
Data Analysis....................................................................................... 37
Data Form............................................................................... 37
Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire..................................... 37

IV RESULTS OF THE STUDY.................................................................. 40

Survey Responses................................................................................ 40
Demographic Data............................................................................... 40
Primary Role........................................................................... 42
Gender.................................................................................... 42
Age......................................................................................... 42
Degree Status.......................................................................... 42
Co-workers............................................................................. 42
District.................................................................................... 46
Supervisor Certification Status............................................... 46
DSM-IV Importance and Usage............................................. 46
Computer Based Report Writers............................................ 47
Curriculum Based Assessment............................................... 47
Psychologist-to-student Ratio................................................ 47
Annual Salary........................................................................ 47
Administrative Roles.............................................................. 50
Contract Length...................................................................... 50
Years of Experience............................................................... 50
National Certification Status.................................................. 52
Psychology Licensure............................................................ 52
Private Practice...................................................................... 52
Remain in Current Position................................................... 52
Remain in the Profession....................................................... 52
Teaching Experience.............................................................. 53
Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire.................................................. 53
Questionnaire Reliability....................................................... 53
Concurrent Validity............................................................... 53
Job Satisfaction Among School Psychologists................................... 55
Overall Job Satisfaction.......................................................... 55
Sources of Job Satisfaction....................................................... 56
Job Satisfaction and Demographic Variables........................... 56
School Psychologists Job Satisfaction: Ten Years Later...................... 60
Summary.............................................................................................. 63
vi
V DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS....................................... 68
Review of the Research Questions and Methodology........................... 68
Summary of the Results and Conclusions............................................ 69
Discussion............................................................................................. 70
Overall Job Satisfaction........................................................................ 70
Factors Contributing to Job Satisfaction............................................... 73
Demographic Variables and Job Satisfaction........................................ 77
School Psychologists Job Satisfaction-Past and Present....................... 78
Implications of the Study....................................................................... 82
Recommendations for the Profession..................................................... 86
Recommendations for Future Research................................................. 88
Summary.............................................................................................. 89

REFERENCES..................................................................................... 91

APPENDICES....................................................................................... 104
Survey Letters........................................................................................ 105
Data Form.............................................................................................. 111

5
 Modified Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire.................................... 114

VITA..................................................................................................... 117
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1. Survey Response Rates................................................................. 41
2. Primary Role Designation.............................................................. 43
3. Age Distribution............................................................................ 44
4. Degree Status................................................................................. 45
5. Psychologist-to-student Ratio......................................................... 48
6. Annual Salary................................................................................. 49
7. Years of Experience...................................................................... 51
8. Reliability Coefficients for MSQ Scales....................................... 54
9. Hierarchy of MSQ Scales............................................................... 57
10. Multiple Regression Summary....................................................... 59
11. Multiple Regression Summary: Brown 1992................................. 61
12. Replication of Brown 1992 model with 2004 data......................... 62
13. t-test Analysis of 2004 and 1992 Studies' Scale Scores................. 64
14. Overall Job Satisfaction Scores utilizing 20 MSQ scales................. 65
15. Goodness of Fit Comparison of Current and 1992 Data................... 66

6
 7

Chapter I

Introduction

For almost one hundred years, employee job satisfaction has been targeted by research. The

origin of these studies dates back to at least 1911, when Taylor began to study employees and their job

duties to develop better ways to train workers (Taylor, 1911). Seven years later, the interest in job

satisfaction had clearly arrived when Edward Thorndike examined the link between work and satisfaction

in the Journal of Applied Psychology in 1918. Some experts in the field suggest that the study of job

satisfaction can be traced back almost 200 years, when the industrial revolution had begun to blossom in

the United States. However, these initial studies were focused on maximizing worker productivity and the

data was often muddled with vague constructs such as "morale" which provided little conceptual clarity

and results that were marginally useful.

By 1927, the study of employee's positive or negative reaction to their jobs had fully begun to

take hold when Elton Mayo first studied the effect of lighting at the Western Electric Hawthorne Works

in Chicago (Bruce & Walton, 1992). These studies showed that lighting had little connection to worker

productivity, creating the fundamental groundwork for future studies that asked about other factors that

may have an impact on employees. The Hawthorne Studies continued until 1932, and in the five-year

interval, the research widened to include factors such as temperature, fatigue, breaks, and working hours.

Mayo's work may seem marginally relevant to job satisfaction today, but he discovered that the mere act

of studying workers and providing them with more attention increased their motivation and productivity.

Mayo had stumbled upon the essence of human motivation, marking a new era of humanistic job

satisfaction research, and revolutionizing the research and theories of job satisfaction.

Job satisfaction studies continue to emerge, and the results are often valued for both humanistic

and financial benefits. When employees are satisfied, they tend to care more about the quality of their

work, they are more committed to the organization, they have higher retention rates, and they are

generally more productive (Bravendam Research Incorporated, 2002). Spector (1997) suggests that job

satisfaction data is helpful in evaluating the emotional wellness and mental fitness of employees and that

organizations can use the information to improve departmental policies and practices where

dissatisfaction is expressed. Training programs at higher learning institutions also value the research for

evaluating their practices and addressing areas of dissatisfaction with practicing professionals in the field.
 8

The practice of school psychology also began to emerge in the late 1800's, as Dr. Lightner

Witmer studied morally and mentally deficient children in the Cattell psychological laboratory

(Merchant, 1983). His studies prompted him to approach the American Psychological Association (APA),

to advocate a "new profession" in the field of psychology (Cutts, 1955). Witmer's vision of psychological

experts in the schools became a reality in 1899, when the Chicago Public Schools first employed

psychologists. New York, Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, and St. Louis all followed suit, and in 1915,

Connecticut hired the first official "School Psychologist" (Cutts, 1955). In these early years of school

psychology, practitioners were mainly used to administer individual intelligence tests for the mentally

disabled. Although the occupation would evolve considerably over the next one hundred years, this

aspect of the career would become the most enduring element of the job (Merchant, 1983).

The growth and development of special education programs and services would have a major

impact on the field of school psychology, as students with disabilities would be identified and placed in

special classes. These assessments and placements were often mandated by state

boards, as were other standards of practice for school psychologists. In the 1950's, the therapeutic element

of the job would emerge as juvenile delinquency was on the rise, and schools were viewed as critical

preventive agencies (Fein, 1974). School psychologists set their sights at understanding the emotional

needs of students, and psychoanalytic methods and treatments were often employed. With the more

expanded and challenging job responsibilities came a need for standardized training programs and job

qualifications. This was the aim of the Thayer Conference of 1955, and the "New Directions in School

Psychology Conference" in 1964. Both concluded that school psychologists need to be aware of and

address the broader societal issues, utilizing clinical, research, learning-theory, and consultation skills.

Within the last 25 years, governing bodies have become heavily involved, with legislation

identifying more and more areas of disabilities that must be served by the schools. Well-trained school

psychologists became frustrated with their heavy assessment responsibilities, and most desired to

diversify their roles to include consultative and direct interventions with students (Smith, 1984). As

school psychologists expressed more and more dissatisfaction with their roles within the school system,

job satisfaction studies in the field began to emerge. Anderson, Hohenshil, & Brown completed one study

on the job satisfaction of school psychologists in 1982. This research surveyed a nationwide sample of

school psychologists and found that 85 percent of surveyed National Organization of School
 9

Psychologists (NASP) members were satisfied or very satisfied with their jobs. Brown (1998) replicated

the study ten years later, with results again showing that 85 percent of practicing school psychologists

who were members of NASP were satisfied or very satisfied with their jobs. Both studies used a modified

version of the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ), and on both the 1982 and 1992 studies,

respondents were satisfied with 18 of the 20 subscales of the MSQ.

Job satisfaction studies have also been completed on the state level, and findings seem to again be

consistent with national estimates. For example, 84.27 percent of Virginia school psychologists reported

being satisfied or very satisfied with their jobs (Levinson, 1983). Similarly, 84.5 percent of Pennsylvania

school psychologists reported being satisfied or very satisfied with their jobs (Levinson, 1989). North

Carolina yielded similar job satisfaction results, with 79.83 percent of the respondents reporting being

satisfied or very satisfied with their jobs. A survey of West Virginia school psychologists showed less

overall satisfaction, with 64.1 percent being satisfied or very satisfied with their jobs.

Levine (1995) has stated that there is an on-going need for research in the area of job satisfaction.

The study of job satisfaction is clearly pertinent to the field of school psychology, and the moderate body

of research in this area speaks to its relevance. In the past ten years, educational and health care reforms,

state mandated testing programs, and budget cuts have all contributed to the restructuring of schools and

other public agencies (Lowry, 1998). In 1990, Public Law 94-142 (The Education for All Handicapped

Children Act) was updated and renamed the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). The

amended law mandates expanded services that must be included in a student's Individualized Educational

Plan (IEP), and Levinson (1993) predicted a direct impact on the roles and functions of school

psychologists. Furthermore, Arnold & Dodge (1994) noted that because of IDEA's provisions for serving

children in the "least restrictive environment", schools nationwide will move toward an inclusion model

of education. All of these factors have direct implications for the roles and functions of school

psychologists nationwide. The impact that educational reforms and workplace changes have had on the

job satisfaction of school psychologists was the focus of this study. The results were compared to those

from Anderson, Hohenshil, & Brown (1984) and Brown, Hohenshil &

Brown (1998). Few would argue that students, school practices, and societal influences are different than

they were a decade ago, and a re-investigation of job satisfaction of school psychologists in this new

century seemed appropriate at this time.

 10

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study was to investigate and describe the job satisfaction of a national sample

of NASP registered practicing school psychologists. This replication study not only documented current

overall job satisfaction levels, but also reported findings of the 20 individual subscales of the Minnesota

Satisfaction Questionnaire that examine the sources of job satisfaction. Demographic data were also

reported as it related to job satisfaction and the specific subscales of the MSQ. This study was descriptive

in nature, and addressed the following research questions. Research Question 1:

What is the overall level of job satisfaction reported by the national sample of school

psychologists? Research Question 2:

What degree of job satisfaction do school psychologists report on each of the 20

subscales of the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire? Research Question 3:

What relationship, if any, do job satisfaction and the selected demographic variables

share?

Research Question 4

How do the current levels of school psychologists' job satisfaction compare to the levels reported

in the 1982 and 1992 national surveys?

Definition of Terms

The following definitions were used in this study.

1. School psychologist--The term "school psychologist" generally refers to a psychologist

with training and experience in education who uses specialized knowledge of assessment, learning and

interpersonal relationships to identify exceptional children and to assist school personnel to enrich the

experience and growth of all children (Cutts, 1955). According to the National Association of School

Psychologists, a school psychologist is someone with specialized training in both psychology and

education who uses their training and skills to team with educators, parents, and other mental health

professionals to ensure that every child learns in a safe, healthy and supportive environment (NASP,

2004). For purposes of this study, the term is used to describe full-time, public school practitioners who

are currently members of the National Association of School Psychologists.

 11

2. Job satisfaction—The term "job satisfaction" has been defined in many ways.

However, for the purposes of this study, the term is defined as a subjective quality that is measured

in the form of an overall job satisfaction score on the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire.

3. National certification--The term "national certification" refers to school

psychologists who have completed the requirements of the National School Psychology

Certification Board (NSPCB).

4. Private practice—The term "private practice" for purposes of this study refers to the

delivery of independent psychological services in a setting other than the employing school district.

These services may include private counseling, behavior management, diagnostic testing, and other

related activities.

Limitations of the Study The

present study was limited by the following:

1. The present study was confined to an analysis of school psychologists who were full-

time, public school practitioners who were also members of the National Association of School

Psychologists (NASP). Therefore, the results may not generalize to school psychologists employed in

other settings, or to school psychologists who are not members of NASP.

2. The survey instruments were mailed to potential respondents and follow-up

interviews were not conducted with non-respondents.

3. The survey instruments contained selected lists of role functions, job duties, and

professional concerns of school psychologists, and were not all-inclusive.

4. The conclusions based on the results of this study were dependant on the views

expressed by those who chose to respond to the survey. It was assumed that the respondents were willing

to openly reveal attitudes and responses which, from their perspectives, represented the best answers to

the survey questions.

Significance of the Study Schools have always been complex

environments of teaching, learning, and personal growth. Schools of the new millennium are no different,

and because schools often mirror society, and the prevalence of violence, drugs, alcohol, and teenage risk
 12

taking seem to be at an all-time high (ACA, 1999; Facundo, 1999). Students today regularly face issues

that were rare or virtually non-existent in earlier generations. Access to the Internet and the World Wide

Web is arguably the most significant change in recent years. Television and movie depictions have also

become much more graphic. Parents now face enormous responsibilities raising their children

and providing proper supervision and guidance. Children are also more vulnerable to these influences due

to decreased parent supervision in the home, an increase in single-parent families, and soaring poverty

rates. Educating these children effectively is becoming more and more difficult, and indeed, the

challenges and responsibilities of school personnel are tremendous.

Working within this complex paradigm, school psychologists play a key role in the effective

school system. They interact with parents, teachers, and students, and their duties often reach beyond

their basic job description. Aside from their traditional assessment duties, school psychologists may work

as liaisons between school and community services, run workshops and in-services, coordinate testing

programs, and perhaps even perform administrative duties. In addition to these services, school

psychologists also have the daunting task of helping children and adolescents through times of crisis or

personal dilemma.

If job satisfaction levels impact work quality, organizational commitment, motivation,

absenteeism, burnout, and achievement, then it goes without saying that school divisions need to facilitate

meaningful work experiences for their school psychologists. School psychologists play a fundamental

role in the educational process, and maximizing their contribution and services to the children should be

paramount. The work in this study was designed to provide school divisions, university training

programs, and national organizations with valuable information on the current levels of job satisfaction of

school psychologists across the United States.

Summary

The purpose of this chapter was to serve as an introduction that presented the problem, and

detailed the purpose, objectives, and significance of the study. Relevant definitions were also included,

along with a discussion of the limitations of the investigation. Chapter II examines pertinent literature

relevant to job satisfaction and school psychology. Chapter III will

describe the investigative techniques used to obtain data for the study, and Chapter IV will present the

findings of the research. Chapter V will provide an interpretation and a discussion of the results.
 13

Chapter II Review of the Literature The general purpose of this study was to document job

satisfaction of school psychologists. The primary goal of this chapter is to review and summarize

literature that is relevant to the understanding job satisfaction among school psychologists. Current views

concerning definition and measurement of job satisfaction will be discussed, and selected job satisfaction

theories will be reviewed. Studies exploring job satisfaction of school psychologists will also be

addressed, with specific focus being placed on job satisfaction variables specific to school psychology.

Definition of Job Satisfaction

To begin a discussion on job satisfaction, one might logically begin with a definition. According

to Webster's Dictionary (1986), job satisfaction refers to how well a job provides fulfillment of a need or

want, or how well it serves as a source or means of enjoyment. Job satisfaction is defined more

specifically in the literature, and several theorists have generated their own workable definitions. Of those

researchers, Robert Hoppock is perhaps the most widely cited, although others have emerged with

definitions reflecting more current theoretical underpinnings of job satisfaction. Some of the versions use

the terms job attitudes, work satisfaction, and job morale interchangeably, which may explain the lack of

a standardized job satisfaction definition.

Within the literature, Hoppock offered one of the earliest definitions of job satisfaction when he

described the construct as being any number of psychological, physiological, and environmental

circumstances which leads a person to express satisfaction with their job (Hoppock, 1935). Smith et. al.

(1969) defined job satisfaction as the feeling an individual has

about his or her job. Locke (1969) suggested that job satisfaction was a positive or pleasurable reaction

resulting from the appraisal of one's job, job achievement, or job experiences. Vroom (1982) defined job

satisfaction as workers' emotional orientation toward their current job roles. Similarly, Schultz (1982)

stated that job satisfaction is essentially the psychological disposition of people toward their work. Siegal

and Lance (1987) stated simply that job satisfaction is an emotional response defining the degree to

which people like their job. Finally, Lofquist and Davis (1991), defined job satisfaction as "an

individual's positive affective reaction of the target environment...as a result of the individual's appraisal

of the extent to which his or her needs are fulfilled by the environment" (p.27).

The definition of job satisfaction has visibly evolved through the decades, but most versions

share the belief that job satisfaction is a work-related positive affective reaction. There seems to be less
 14

consistency when talking about the causes of job satisfaction. Wexley and Yukl (1984) stated that job

satisfaction is influenced by many factors, including personal traits and characteristics of the job. To

better understand these employee and job characteristics and their relationship to job satisfaction, various

theories have emerged and provided the vital framework for future job satisfaction studies. Early

traditional theories suggested that a single bipolar continuum, with satisfaction on one end and

dissatisfaction on the other, could be used to conceptualize job satisfaction. Later revisions of the theory

included a two-continuum model that placed job satisfaction on the first scale, and job dissatisfaction on

the second (Brown, 1998). These later theories focused more on the presence or absence of certain

intrinsic and extrinsic job factors that could determine one's satisfaction level. Intrinsic factors are based

on personal perceptions and internal feelings, and include factors such as recognition, advancement, and

responsibility. These factors have been strongly linked to job satisfaction according to

O'Driscoll and Randall (1999). Extrinsic factors are external job related variables that would include

salary, supervision, and working conditions. These extrinsic factors have also been found to have a

significant influence on job satisfaction levels according to Martin and Schinke

(1998).

Theories of Job Satisfaction There are numerous theories attempting to

explain job satisfaction, but three conceptual frameworks seem to be more prominent in the literature.

The first is content theory, which suggests that job satisfaction occurs when one's need for growth and

self-actualization are met by the individual's job. The second conceptual framework is often referred to as

process theory, which attempts to explain job satisfaction by looking at how well the job meets one's

expectations and values. The third conceptual group includes situational theories, which proposes that job

satisfaction is a product of how well an individual's personal characteristics interact or mesh with the

organizational characteristics. Each of the three theoretical frameworks has been explored and reviewed

by countless scholars and researchers, and the purpose of this chapter is not to provide an exhaustive

review of job satisfaction theories. Instead, a highlight of the main theories and theorists from each

framework will be offered, to provide clarity, relevance and direction to this study of job satisfaction.

Content Theories

When discussing human needs, growth, and self-actualization, one cannot look far before finding

Abraham Maslow and his "hierarchy of needs". Maslow's (1954) traditionalist views of job satisfaction
 15

were based on his five-tier model of human needs. At the lowest tier, basic life sustaining needs such as

water, food, and shelter were identified. The next level consisted of physical and financial security, while

the third tier included needs of social acceptance,

belonging, and love. The fourth tier incorporated self-esteem needs and recognition by one's peers, and at

the top of the pyramid was reserved for self-actualization needs such as personal autonomy and self-

direction. According to Maslow, the needs of an individual exist in a logical order and that the basic

lower level needs must be satisfied before those at higher levels. Then, once the basic needs are fulfilled,

they no longer serve as motivators for the individual. The more a job allows for growth and acquisition of

higher level needs, the more likely the individual is to report satisfaction with his or her job. Furthermore,

the success of motivating people depends on recognizing the needs that are unsatisfied and helping the

individual to meet those needs.

Building on the theories of Maslow, Frederick Hertzburg (1974) suggested that the work itself

could serve as a principal source of job satisfaction. His approach led to the aforementioned two-

continuum model of job satisfaction where job satisfaction was placed on one continuum and job

dissatisfaction was placed on a second. Hertzberg's theory recognized that work characteristics generated

by dissatisfaction were quite different from those created by satisfaction. He identified the factors that

contribute to each dimension as "motivators" and "hygienes". The motivators are intrinsic factors that

influence satisfaction based on fulfillment of higher level needs such as achievement, recognition, and

opportunity for growth. The hygiene factors are extrinsic variables that such as work conditions, pay, and

interpersonal relationships that must be met to prevent dissatisfaction. When hygiene factors are poor,

work will be dissatisfying. However, simply removing the poor hygienes does not equate to satisfaction.

Similarly, when people are satisfied with their job, motivators are present, but removing the motivators

does not automatically lead to dissatisfaction. Essentially, job satisfaction depends on the extrinsic

characteristics of the job, in relation to the job's ability to fulfill ones higher level

needs of self-actualization. Hence the two continuum model of Hertzberg's Motivator-Hygiene theory.

Process Theories

Process theories attempt to explain job satisfaction by looking at expectancies and values

(Gruneberg, 1979). This theory of job satisfaction suggests that workers' select their behaviors in order to

meet their needs. Within this framework, Adams' (1963) and Vroom (1982) have become the most
 16

prominent theorists. J. Stacy Adams' suggested that people perceive their job as a series of inputs and

outcomes. Inputs are factors such as experience, ability, and effort, while outcomes include things like

salary, recognition, and opportunity. The theory is based on the premise that job satisfaction is a direct

result of individuals' perceptions of how fairly they are treated in comparison to others. This "equity

theory" proposes that people seek social equity in the rewards they expect for performance. In other

words, people feel satisfied at work when the input or contribution to a job and the resulting outcome are

commensurate to that of their coworkers. According to Milkovich and Newman (1990), this social equity

is not limited to others within the same workplace, and the equity comparisons often reach into other

organizations that are viewed as similar places of employment.

Vroom's (1964) theory of job satisfaction was similar in that it looked at the interaction between

personal and workplace variables; however, he also incorporated the element of workers' expectations

into his theory. The essence of this theory is that if workers put forth more effort and perform better at

work, then they will be compensated accordingly. Discrepancies that occur between expected

compensation and actual outcome lead to dissatisfaction. If employees receive less than they expect or

otherwise feel as if they have been treaded unfairly, then dissatisfaction may occur. Conversely,

overcompensation may also lead to

dissatisfaction and the employee may experience feelings of guilt. The compensation does not have to be

monetary, but pay is typically the most visible and most easily modified element of outcome. Salary also

has significance beyond monetary value and the potential to acquire material items, and Gruneberg

(1979) notes that it is also an indication of personal achievement, organizational status, and recognition.

Vroom's theory also goes one step further to incorporate an individual's personal decision making

within the work-place. Vroom (1982) explained that employees would choose to do or not do job tasks

based on their perceived ability to carry out the task and earn fair compensation. To illustrate and clarify

his ideas, Vroom generated a three-variable equation for scientifically determining job satisfaction.

Expectancy is the first variable, and this is the individual's perception of how well he or she can carry out

the given task. Instrumentality is the second variable of the equation, and this refers to the individual's

confidence that he or she will be compensated fairly for performing the task. Valence is the third variable,

which considers the value of the expected reward to the employee. In Vroom's formula each variable is
 17

given a probability value, and when all three factors are high, workers will be more satisfied and have

more motivation. If any of the factors are low, work performance and employee motivation will decline.

Situational Theories

The situational occurrences theory emerged in 1992, when Quarstein, McAfee, and Glassman

stated that job satisfaction is determined by two factors: situational characteristics and situational

occurrences. Situational characteristics are things such as pay, supervision, working conditions,

promotional opportunities, and company policies that typically are considered by the employee before

accepting the job. The situational occurrences are things that occur after taking a job that may be tangible

or intangible, positive or negative. Positive occurrences might include

extra vacation time, while negative occurrences might entail faulty equipment or strained co-worker

relationships. Within this theoretical framework, job satisfaction is a product of both situational

factors and situational occurrences.

Measurement of Job Satisfaction

Measuring job satisfaction is difficult, for it is an abstract personal cognition that exists only in an

individual's mind. To measure job satisfaction, one must have a conceptual understanding of the construct

in order to decide what indirect factors to measure. Since there is no single agreed upon definition of job

satisfaction, and no widely accepted theory to explain it, it is no surprise that there is also no general

consensus on the best way to measure job satisfaction (Wanous & Lawler, 1972). The most basic forms

of measurement might include an interview, a single-item measure, or a workplace observation; however,

most researchers opt for a more objective and in-depth survey instrument (Spector, 1997). Questionnaires

are easily distributed, have less room for bias, have increased likelihood of confidentiality, and require

much less time and money than one-on-one interviews (Pedhazur & Schmelkin, 1991). Job satisfaction

questionnaires also can examine any number of facets that have hypothesized impact on job satisfaction,

although the lack of common agreement with definition and theory can present challenges when

weighting each facet and interpreting the results (Evans, 1969). The most widely cited survey instruments

found in the literature include The Job Satisfaction Survey (JSS), the Job Descriptive Index (JDI) and the

Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ). The Job Satisfaction Survey

 18

The Job Satisfaction Survey was developed by Paul E. Spector to assess employee attitudes about

the job and aspects of the job. The JSS is a 36 item questionnaire that targets nine separate facets of job

satisfaction. Those facets include pay, promotion, benefits, supervision,

contingent rewards, operating procedures, coworkers, nature of work, and communication. Each of these

facets is assessed with four items, and a total score is computed from all 36 items. Responses to each

question range from "strongly disagree" to "strongly agree", and questions are written in both directions.

Job Descriptive Index

The Job Descriptive Index (JDI) was first discussed in Smith, Kendall, and Hulin's publication of

the Measurement of Satisfaction in Work and Retirement (1969). This 90-item scale is designed to

measure employees' satisfaction with their jobs by looking at five important aspects or facets of job

satisfaction which are present job, present pay, opportunities for promotion, supervision, and coworkers.

It has been widely used and researched for over 40 years, and it has become one of the most popular job

satisfaction survey instruments (DeMeuse, 1985; Zedeck, 1987). In fact, more than 12,000 research

studies are currently archived by the JDI Research Group.

Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire

Developed in 1967 by Weiss, Dawis, England, & Lofquist, the Minnesota Satisfaction

Questionnaire (MSQ) has become a widely used instrument to evaluate job satisfaction. Three forms of

the MSQ have been developed, two 100-item long forms (1977 version and 1967 version) and a 20-item

short form. The MSQ is designed to measure specific aspects of an employee's satisfaction with his or her

job, and it provides more information on the rewarding aspects of a job than do more general measures of

job satisfaction. The MSQ has been widely used in studies exploring client vocational needs, in

counseling follow-up studies, and in generating information about the reinforcers in jobs (Vocational

Psychology Research, 2002).

 19

The MSQ is a gender-neutral, self-administered paper-and-pencil inventory that is written on a

fifth-grade level. The short form can be completed in about 5 minutes while the long form can be

completed in 15 to 20 minutes. Although both the short and long forms provide job satisfaction estimates,

the long form provides much more information for the short additional administration time required. The

MSQ can be used in an individual or group setting, and standardized instructions for administration are

provided. The 1977 revision of the MSQ (originally copyrighted in 1963) uses a standard five-point

response scale. Response choices are "Very Satisfied", "Satisfied", "N" (Neither Satisfied nor

Dissatisfied), "Dissatisfied" and "Very Dissatisfied." This response format was found to have a ceiling

effect which caused the scale score distributions to be negatively skewed. The 1967 version adjusted for

this by changing the response options to "Not Satisfied," "Somewhat Satisfied," "Satisfied," "Very

Satisfied," and "Extremely Satisfied. This modification resulted in a symmetrical scale score distribution

that centered on the "satisfied" category and evidenced larger item variance. Although researchers often

prefer this format, the normative data for the 1967 version of the MSQ is more limited. Thus, the 1967

version is recommended for prediction studies or for comparisons within organizations where normative

data is unnecessary (Vocational Psychology Research, 2002).

Determinants of Job Satisfaction

A review of the literature shows that numerous variables have been investigated in their

relationship to job satisfaction. These variables include demographic data (e.g. age, gender, and race),

intrinsic features of the job (e.g. recognition, advancement, and responsibility), and extrinsic variables

(e.g. salary, supervision, and working conditions).

 20

Demographic Variables

Research has often focused on age as a factor influencing job satisfaction. Available literature is

somewhat inconclusive however, with some studies showing no significant impact (Miller, 1985: Brown,

1998), some showing a gradual linear increase of satisfaction as age increases (Hulin, 1963; Weaver,

1980; Anderson, Hohenshil & Brown, 1984; Sutter, 1994), and some suggesting that satisfaction is

curvilinear and changes throughout the lifespan of the employee (Hertzberg et. al., 1957). Generally

speaking, job satisfaction tends to increase gradually with age (Spector, 1997). Hertzberg et. al, (1957)

attributes this trend to the fact that job expectations tend to become more realistic as employees age and

mature. This pattern may change to show a relative decline in satisfaction after age 55 (Jewel, 1990), but

this may be linked to the decreased physical energy and enthusiasm that may accompany the aging

process. Still, many studies fail to show this late-career job satisfaction drop-off, and Quinn, Staines, and

McCullough (1974) reported that older workers remain satisfied because of promotions and acquiring

more desirable positions within organizations. Others justify the findings by noting that people change

jobs 6-7 times in a lifetime, and as people get older, they become more aware of their needs and make

better choices. This incongruence of literature is likely due to situational job variances, and Zeitz (1990)

supported this logic by demonstrating significant differences between satisfaction levels of federal

employees based on their positions as elite professionals, non-elite professionals, and non-professionals.

Gender has also received a great deal of attention in job satisfaction studies, but again the

research is inconclusive. In 1997, Thompson and McNamara reviewed all job satisfaction studies

published in the Educational Administration Quarterly over the past six years and showed no significant

difference between male and female satisfaction levels. Other studies that have

shown no significant difference between gender and job satisfaction levels include Barbash (1976),

D'Arcy, Syrotuik, & Siddique (1984), and Iiacqua et. al. (1995). Smith, Smitz, and Hoy, (1998) arrived at

similar insignificant findings until they compared the gender of the employee to the gender of the

employer. They found that women were more significantly more satisfied than men in small companies

with female supervision, while males were significantly more satisfied in larger companies with male

supervisors. Studies suggesting that gender does affect job satisfaction are available, and data can be

found to suggest that either men are more satisfied (Locke, Fitzpatrick & White, 1983; Black & Holden,
 21

1998, Weaver, 1977) or that women are generally more satisfied (Kramen-Kahn & Hansen, 1998,

Chapman & Lower, 1982). The inconsistencies, according to Gruneberg (1979), are closely linked to

differences among expectations, respect, promotional prospects, salary, social interactions, and coping

strategies of males and females and the jobs they often hold. Others suggest that men are more satisfied

with their jobs than women because of unequal treatments in the workplace, and that under equal work

conditions, women are more satisfied with their jobs than men.

Race has also been investigated in job satisfaction studies, and once again, data is inconclusive.

Brush, Moch, and Pooyan (1987) found no significant racial differences when comparing fifteen job

satisfaction studies; however, Weaver (1980) reports that non-whites are consistently less satisfied than

Caucasian employees. Some researchers agree that a racial difference does exist, but that whites are more

satisfied with their jobs primarily because of unequal treatment in the workplace. Regardless of the

specific demographic variable, be it age, gender, or race, Landy and Trumbo (1980) suggest that job

satisfaction variances may exist, but they are very small (2-5 percent). Weaver (1978) agrees, and goes on

to say that any differences that do exist, seem to disappear when factors such as education, salary, and

status are controlled.

Salary

Many researchers have identified salary as a fundamental variable in the study of job satisfaction

(Miller, 1985; Derlin and Schnieder, 1994; Solly and Hohenshil, 1986) Furthermore, the relationship

between salary and job satisfaction has been addressed by virtually all job satisfaction studies in the last

80 years. Although the earliest research suggested that salary was not a significant predictor of job

satisfaction (Hoppock, 1935; Hertzberg, Mausner, Peterson and Capwell, 1957), later studies began to

suggest that salary was a factor up to a certain point in an employee's career (Hertzberg, 1966). By the

1970's, salary was being viewed as a more significant factor in job satisfaction, and in studies such as the

one conducted by Dyer and Theriault (1976) salary was found to be the most significant factor in

determining job satisfaction. Other researchers of the 1970's also spoke to the significant relationship

between salary and satisfaction, but they argued that although low salary was a cause of dissatisfaction,

high salary was not necessarily related to satisfaction (Lawler, 1971). More recent studies have generally

shown a positive relationship between pay and job satisfaction (Lucas et. al, 1990; Lee and Wilbur, 1985;
 22

Rhodes, 1983; Kanungo, 1982), but the relationship seems to be linked more to perceptions of equity and

fairness than actual dollar amount (Hulin and Smith, 1965; Spector, 1997). Social comparison appears to

be a key factor when looking at the relationship between satisfaction and salary, but employee

expectations are also fundamental. According to Adams (1965), employees must feel that there is an

equitable balance between the amount of work performed and the compensation received. In other words,

if a worker feels that the compensation is either too large or too small for the amount of work performed,

dissatisfaction may occur.

In urban areas workers often have more job opportunities, better schools, more public

transportation, better salary, higher prestige, and greater opportunities for spousal employment. Perhaps it

is these factors that explained Arnold, Seekins, & Nelson's (1997) and Finley's (1991) findings that

showed higher levels of job satisfaction in urban educational professionals when compared to those in

rural settings. On the other hand, rural settings and smaller communities can provide family-oriented

settings, lower crime rates, recreational access and overall enhanced "quality of life". Two of the most

commonly mentioned disadvantages to rural settings have been professional isolation and lack of

opportunity for professional development. However, recent advancements in telecommunications and

interactive networking through the Internet may decrease feelings of isolation and improve rural job

satisfaction levels in the future.

Interpersonal Factors

Within the context of job satisfaction research, interpersonal relationships are the elements that

make up the social and support network of the employee. These elements include the relationship with

one's supervisor, the social interaction with co-workers, and even the interactions with clients and/or

customers. According to Brown (1998), employee supervision and interaction have been found to be the

two most significant interpersonal factors when looking at job satisfaction.

The importance of co-worker social support has been investigated for decades. As far back as the

Hawthorne Studies of the 1920's, research has shown that workers who belong to a social group and have

friendships on the job tend to be more satisfied (Maynard, 1986). Maynard

suggests further that employees who lack social support at work experience more stress, have less coping

techniques, and are generally less satisfied. Fellow employees can satisfy many social needs, and
 23

sympathetic and supportive co-workers can increase job satisfaction (Green, 2000). Co-workers are also

vital for evaluating the equity and fairness of ones pay and work requirements, and social needs studies

have shown that co-worker job satisfaction can influence one's own job satisfaction (Brown, 1998).

The nature of supervision provided can also have a significant impact on job satisfaction. Studies

have shown that employees who have positive interactions with supervisors are generally more satisfied

at work (Bruce and Blackburn, 1992; Vroom, 1982). Positive interactions tend to include constructive

feedback, effective communication, and a focus on quality rather than quantity (Schroffel, 1999). Positive

supervisory relationships are also those that treat the employees with respect, those that promote staff

cohesion but allow for individual thinking, and those that fulfill employee's functional and interpersonal

needs (Locke, 1970). Supervision is a complex variable however, and it is unrealistic to assume that job

satisfaction can be guaranteed as long as supervisors interact positively with their employees. Individual

personality characteristics may, for example, affect the employee's needs and management expectations.

For example, Schroffel (1999) suggests that employees who have more experience desire less supervision

and employees with less experience prefer more supervision. Also, studies have shown that organizational

setting can affect the employee's desired supervisory relationship. In chaotic, ambiguous, or otherwise

unstructured job settings, employees tend to prefer more structured supervision. Conversely, in jobs

where tasks are clearly defined and workers are well trained, a less structured supervisory style is

preferred (House and Mitchell, 1974).

Intrinsic factors

Work is unquestionably an intrinsic part of peoples' lives. "It is often our source of identity and at

times our reason for being" (Bruce and Blackburn, 1992, p. 4). Aside from decent pay, economic security,

and other extrinsic and tangible rewards of employment, the intrinsic aspects of work are also relevant to

the study of job satisfaction. Intrinsic factors are employees' affective reactions to the job, such as their

satisfaction with the freedom they have to choose their own methods of working, the recognition that they

receive for good work, and the opportunity they have to use their ability. Intrinsic factors may also

include perceived respect and responsibility, task variety, and meaningful work. These personally

rewarding intrinsic factors have demonstrated a significant impact on job satisfaction in many studies

(Hertzberg et. al., 1957; O'Driscoll & Randall, 1999, Locke, 1976, Valentine, Valentine & Dick, 1988).

Dodd-McCue and Wright (1996) found that job satisfaction is enhanced by the value placed on one's
 24

professional role and identification with that role, but negatively affected by choosing the job because

rewards are extrinsic (external to the work itself, such as fellow workers, salary, or promotion

opportunities). Martinez-Ponz (1990) found that intrinsic rewards were more effective in increasing job

satisfaction and commitment among teachers than were financial incentives. Similarly, Reyes, Madsen,

and Taylor (1989) found that intrinsic rewards had more influence on educators than any organizational

rewards.

Stewart (2000) suggested that helping to make workers feel independent had large positive effects

on both performance and satisfaction outcomes. Kirkman and Rosen's (1999) work also spoke to the

importance of worker autonomy and it's positive relationship with job satisfaction and performance.

Cappelli (2000) highlighted the importance of intrinsic rewards when participants rated interesting work,

open communications, and opportunities for

advancement as the top three things they desire in their jobs. Tatsapaugh (1994) suggested that the lack of

advancement on the job is a frequent factor influencing resignation. When employee's feel their work is

meaningful and that they are responsible for their outcomes, Thomas & Tymon, (1997) state that workers

show higher levels of effort and attention to doing tasks well.

Job Satisfaction in School Psychology Since the enactment of Public Law 94-

142 or the Individual with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), the number of school psychologists in the

United States has been on the rise. IDEA increased the range of disabilities served by special education

programs and created more demand for school psychological services. Unfortunately, the needed services

are primarily testing related, which may significantly limit the roles and functions of practicing school

psychologists to just one aspect of their training. This role diversity has been a factor in earlier job

satisfaction studies (Levinson, 1989) along with other variables such as supervision, demographic

differences, responsibility, caseload, etc. This section of the literature review will look at the job

satisfaction studies of school psychologists, and discuss the findings in relation to the various factors that

have been found to impact job satisfaction levels. Overall Job Satisfaction Levels

To date, only two nationwide job satisfaction surveys have been completed in the field of school

psychology. In both studies, random samples of school psychologists from NASP member lists were

surveyed using a modified version of the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire. In both the Anderson,
 25

Hohenshil, & Brown (1984) study and the Brown, Hohenshil & Brown (1998) study, 85 percent of school

psychologists indicated that they were satisfied with their jobs.

State-wide job satisfaction studies have also yielded similar findings, and Levinson, Fetchkan and

Hohenshil (1998) reported that 84 percent of Virginia school psychologists were satisfied or very satisfied

with their jobs. Similarly, 84.5 percent of Pennsylvania school psychologists reported being satisfied or

very satisfied with their jobs (Levinson, 1989). North Carolina yielded similar job satisfaction results,

with 79.83 percent of the respondents reporting being satisfied or very satisfied with their jobs (South,

1990). A survey of West Virginia school psychologists showed less overall satisfaction, with 64.1 percent

being satisfied or very satisfied with their jobs (Solly and Hohenshil, 1986). Demographic Variables

Anderson, Hohenshil, & Brown (1984) suggest that a positive relationship between age and job

satisfaction exists, perhaps because school psychologists learn to modify their job or their needs as they

gain experience and grow older. Other studies such as Brown, Hohenshil & Brown (1998) and Levinson,

Fetchkan and Hohenshil (1988) have not found a significant relationship between age and job satisfaction,

although the age of the participants in the surveys tended to be younger. Gender

Although gender has typically not proved to be a significant predictor of job satisfaction either in

school psychologists (Anderson, Hohenshil, & Brown, 1984) or in business settings, Brown, Hohenshil &

Brown (1998) reported that female school psychologists were more likely to be satisfied with their jobs.

Brown et. al. hypothesized that females view school psychology as an attractive career because of the

work hours and because the job offers some women the opportunity to advance into a higher paying, non-

teaching position. Brown et. al also speculated

that men have more difficulty accepting the lack of power that may accompany the support

personnel positions in education.

Salary

The relationship between pay and job satisfaction seems to be dynamic in the field of school

psychology, and the existing literature is inconsistent. Initially, satisfaction levels were thought to be

positive correlated with pay (Solly, 1983; Solly and Hohenshil, 1986; South, 1990); however, other

studies found no relationship between salary and job satisfaction (Anderson, 1982; Levinson, 1983;

Brown et. al., 1998). The inconsistency of the findings may be due to the fact that some school systems
 26

place school psychologists on a teacher pay scale while others place them on an administrative salary

schedule. Alternatively, length of contract may be at the root of the discrepancy due to the fact that

considerable salary variation exists between the common ten and twelve month positions. Supervision

Professional supervision is fundamental component of school psychologist training (NASP,

2003). Unfortunately, many practicing school psychologists did not have adequate supervision while in

training and many currently have insufficiently trained supervisors (Zins, Murphy, & Wess, 1989; South,

1990). Just as adequate supervision is correlated with higher levels of job satisfaction (South, 1990; Solly

and Hohenshil, 1986), school psychologists with inadequate supervision have been found to experience

lower levels of job satisfaction (Anderson, Hohenshil, & Brown, 1984; Levinson, 1983; Levinson,

Fetchkan & Hohenshil, 1988, Solly, 1983; South, 1990; Solly and Hohenshil, 1986).

Urban vs. Rural Work site

School psychologists in rural areas have generally expressed higher satisfaction with their job

than those working in more urban settings (Solly and Hohenshil, 1986). This is perhaps due to the fact

that rural school psychologists have more diverse roles in the school system, have better relationships

with their supervisors, and are more satisfied with their work environments (Ehly & Reimers, 1986).

Barker (1986) speculates that the smaller schools that are often found in rural settings tend to provide

workers with closer relationships between faculty, staff, students, and administrators. Some studies have

not supported the rural work site and higher job satisfaction relationship, and instead found that rural

school psychologists expressed twice as much dissatisfaction with their jobs (Solly and Hohenshil, 1986).

This may be related to the fact that rural school psychologists tend to have less job experience and larger

caseloads than those do in urban settings (Hughes, 1982). Professional Affiliation

Previous studies have demonstrated a positive relationship between national professional

organization membership and job satisfaction levels, while membership in state and local organizations

have shown to be negatively related to job satisfaction. (Levinson, Fetchkan & Hohenshil, 1998). While

both national and local professional organizations provide support for school psychologists, Brown (1998)

speculates that dissatisfied workers are more likely to join local organizations that are more capable at

making changes to school policies and practices. Case Load

 27

Heavy case loads have been linked to lower job satisfaction, more role conflict, more stress, and

higher rates of burnout (Anderson, Hohenshil, & Brown, 1984; Jorde, 1982; Reiner & Hartshorne, 1982,

Ahrens, 1977, Wright& Gutkin, 1981). As psychologist-to-student ratio

increases, role diversity, boundary spanning activities and direct and indirect interventions decline

(Jerrell, 1984; Keith, Brown, & Oberman, 1992). O'Day (1998) reported that NASP recommends one

school psychologist for every one thousand students, and when this ratio is exceeded school

psychologists' roles and functions often become restricted. To keep up with the special education testing,

school psychologists with heavy case loads get confined by their assessment responsibilities, and likely

become dissatisfied because they have less time to counsel children, fewer opportunities to consult with

parents and teachers, and limited room to perform boundary role activities (Smith, 1984). Boundary

Spanning Activities

School psychologists engage in boundary spanning activities when they serve as community

liaisons or engage in tasks such as program development that require them to work with other agencies,

organizations or departments. In most studies of school psychologists, boundary-spanning activities have

been associated with higher levels of job satisfaction. (Jerrell, 1984; South, 1990). Opportunities for

Advancement

A review of the literature evidenced no support for a significant relationship between

advancement opportunities and high levels of job satisfaction. In studies of school counselors, Kirk

(1988) and Murray (1995) found that out of 20 scales contributing to job satisfaction, advancement

opportunities ranked nineteenth. Findings are available however, which suggest that poor opportunity for

advancement is related to job dissatisfaction (Herzberg, Mausner, Peterson, & Capwell 1957; Anderson,

Hohenshil, & Brown, 1984; Levinson, 1983; Levinson, Fetchkan & Hohenshil, 1988, South, 1990; Solly

and Hohenshil, 1986). Brown, Hohenshil, and Brown (1998) explained that certification requirements of

the position may limit school

psychologists from moving into administrative or other special service positions. Levinson et. al (1998)

spoke to this point by explaining that the position of the school psychologist is both an entry and a

terminal position. Levison (1991) also explains that the dissatisfaction is even more pronounced in larger

school divisions, although the dissatisfaction tends to decline as pay increases. Role Diversity
 28

In a recent study completed in Virginia by Lowry (1998), school psychologists reported spending

most of their time performing special education testing, participating in eligibility committee meetings,

and meeting with parents, teacher, and administrators. Smith (1984) reported similarly that school

psychologists spend approximately 70 percent of their time evaluating children for disabilities, 20 percent

of their time meeting with parents and school colleagues, and only 10 percent of their time in counseling

activities. Reschly & Wilson (1995) add that in surveys completed in 1986 and 1991, more than half of

the school psychologists surveyed estimated that they spent at least 75% of their time psychological

testing activities. In both studies, practitioners desired to reduce their traditional testing roles in favor of

more direct services with children and problem solving consultation (Reschly & Wilson, 1995).

When a large discrepancy exists between desired and actual roles, school psychologists have

consistently demonstrated lower levels of job satisfaction (Levinson, 1990). Furthermore, when the roles

of school psychologists are restricted, satisfaction levels decreases (Jerrell, 1984; South, 1990). A lack of

role diversity has also been shown to limit the effectiveness of services and increase the likelihood of

burnout (Huberty and Huebner, 1988). The reason for the actual and desired role discrepancy is largely

related to special education laws such as the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) which

dictate equality for children with disabilities.

These laws define the role of the school psychologist to include assessment, consultation, and parent

training. As a result, Jenkins and Crumbly (1986) report that special education duties of school

psychologists increased 30% after the enactment of Public Law 94-142 (Education of the Handicapped

Act). It seems ironic that the legislation that caused a surge in the need for school psychologists (Dwyer &

Gorin, 1996), is also one of the primary sources of role restriction and dissatisfaction within the

profession. System Policies and Practices

Studies related to job satisfaction have demonstrated that local and state administrative policies

influence satisfaction with work (Herzberg, Mausner, Peterson, and Capwell, 1957; Bacharach,

Bamberger, & Mitchell, 1990; Kendrick, Chandler, & Hatcher, 1994; Ponec & Brock, 2000). School

system policies have also been shown to have a direct effect on employee morale (Fournet, Distefano, &

Pryer, 1969). When school psychologists are dissatisfied with school system policies and practices, they

tend to have lower job satisfaction (Anderson, Hohenshil, & Brown, 1984; Levinson, 1989, Levinson,

Fetchkan & Hohenshil, 1988; Solly and Hohenshil, 1986). Levinson (1990) explains that local and state
 29

administrative policies are often decided without input from the psychologists, and these policies may

ultimately restrict the roles of school psychologists. Levinson's study also showed that this dissatisfaction

with system policies and practices tends to be more significant in larger school districts where political

bureaucracy may be more prevalent.

Summary

The purpose of this chapter was to present literature relevant to job satisfaction and school

psychology. Varying definitions and prominent theories were presented, along with a discussion of the

instrumentation frequently employed to measure job satisfaction. To date, there

have been two comprehensive national surveys of school psychologists. Completed in 1982 and 1992, ten

years have now elapsed since a nationwide survey has been conducted. In the dawn of the new

millennium, school psychologists are faced with extreme challenges on a daily basis. Completing a

national replication survey was not only appropriate at this time, but also vital to school divisions,

university training programs, and national organizations. Job satisfaction affects work quality,

organizational commitment, motivation, absenteeism, burnout, and achievement, and this research

provides valuable insight into the status of school psychologists today.

Chapter III

Methodology

This chapter specifies the methodological strategy and procedures chosen for this study. The

population sample is described and the participant selection process is explained. The methods used for

distribution and collection of the survey are discussed. Statistical treatments of the survey data are

outlined.

Research Questions

The procedures described in this chapter were devised to answer each of the following research

questions: Research Question 1:

What is the overall level of job satisfaction reported by the national sample of school

psychologists? Research Question 2:

What degree of job satisfaction do school psychologists report on each of the 20 subscales

of the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire? Research Question 3:

 30

What relationship, if any, do job satisfaction and the selected demographic variables

share?

Research Question 4

How do the current levels of school psychologists' job satisfaction compare to the levels reported

in the 1982 and 1992 national surveys?

Participants

The participants for this study were a sample of school psychologists who are members of the

National Association of School Psychologists (NASP). NASP was founded in 1969 with 455 members,

and by June 2000, membership totals were listed in the September Communique as 21,942. NASP

members hail from all fifty states, and represent significant demographic and geographic diversity. A

random sample of 500 participants was obtained through Alex Hyman of NASP. The sample size was felt

to be sufficient for representing the members of NASP once the student members were excluded from the

total number of NASP members. Instrumentation

Each participant for this replication study was asked to complete a demographic data form and a

modified 1977 version of the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ). The data form (appendix A)

was used to identify the respondent's demographic information such as age, sex, education, and

professional affiliations. Additionally, job characteristics were targeted by questions about the number of

students served, salary and contract lengths, role functions, and intent to remain in their job or in the field

of school psychology.

As with the original 1982 study completed by Anderson, Hohenshil, and Brown, and again in the

1992 Brown research, the modified 1977 version of the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ) was

again employed for data collection. The MSQ has been used in many job satisfaction surveys, and

Anderson (1982) reports strong reliability and concurrent validity estimates. The MSQ was designed to

examine the sources of work reinforcement and job satisfaction by evaluating 20 domains of job

satisfaction. The 20 subdomains of the MSQ that were used to comprise the overall job satisfaction

estimates are as follows:

1. Ability Utilization - opportunity to use abilities

2. Achievement - feeling of accomplishment from work

 31

3. Activity - keeping busy

4. Advancement - opportunity for promotion

5. Authority - being in-charge of others

6. System policies and practices - school policy implementation

7. Compensation - perceived balance of work performed to salary received

8. Co-Workers - relationships with co-workers

9. Creativity - flexibility to try one's own methods

10. Independence - opportunity to work alone

11. Moral Values - opportunity to act in ways that do not go against beliefs

12. Recognition - acknowledgment for a job well done

13. Responsibility - freedom to use personal judgement

14. Security - anticipation of steady employment

15. Social Service - being able to help others

16. Social Status - being respected in the community

17. Supervision-human relations - relationship between employee and supervisors

18. Supervision-technical - the technical quality of the supervision

19. Variety - the opportunity to do different things

20. Working Conditions - physical aspects of the work environment

Each of the above subscales is composed of five questions that are rated on a four-point scale.

Respondents were asked to rate their job on each question by checking that they are Very Satisfied,

Satisfied, Dissatisfied or Very Dissatisfied. All 100 responses from the twenty subscales were combined

to obtain an overall job satisfaction score.

Data Collection Process All survey materials were distributed and

returned by U.S. mail. There were five steps in the data collection process; a pre-letter, the initial survey

distribution, a postcard reminder, and two follow-up mailings. Pre-Letter

One week prior to the first mailing of survey materials a pre-letter was sent to all participants.

The letter was endorsed by several members of the author's dissertation committee and described the
 32

purpose of the study and confidentiality of responses, and encouraged participation in the study. First

Mailing

The first mailing included an explanatory letter and survey materials with a stamped, self-

addressed envelope for the return of the materials. Each packet was coded to facilitate follow-up of non-

respondents. Postcard Reminder

Two weeks after the initial survey mailing a postcard reminder was sent to all participants asking

for their cooperation and urging them to complete the survey materials. Participants who had not received

a survey were asked to call or email the author to have the materials sent to them.

First Follow-up

Approximately six weeks after the initial survey mailing a second mailing was sent to all

participants who had not yet responded. An accompanying letter assured participants of confidentiality

and urged their response using the enclosed self-addressed stamped envelope.

Second Follow-up

Fifteen weeks after the initial mailing a third packet was mailed to those persons who had not

responded. The packet included a letter from the chairman of the dissertation committee and a set of

survey materials with a stamped self-addressed envelope.

Data Analysis

Returned surveys were hand scored and the responses were entered into a SPSS data file. Data

Form

For each of the categories of demographic information on the data form, sums, averages, and

percentages were calculated as appropriate. Monthly salary was adjusted according to the length of

contract specified by the respondent. Gender, intention to remain in current position and field for the next

five years, and other demographic questions answered with either a yes or a no were treated as

dichotomous nominal variables. All of the remaining demographic variables, such as age and years of

service were treated as ordinal variables, except for salary, which was converted into a new variable by

dividing yearly income by contract length. Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire

Each of the items on the modified MSQ had four possible response items, each assigned an

ordinal weight. Very Dissatisfied (VDS) was given an ordinal weight of 1, Dissatisfied (DS) was assigned
 33

an ordinal weight of 2, Satisfied (S) was given an ordinal weight of 3, and Very Satisfied (VS) was

assigned an ordinal weight of 4. Thus, higher scores indicated higher levels of job satisfaction. With five

questions per subscale, totals for each of the 20 areas could range from 5 to 20. Incomplete items were

filled in using the modal score for the other four questions within the subscale. If two items are left blank

in any of the 20 subscales, then the scale was not scored.

Following the data analysis procedures used in the Brown (1998) study, each response option was

assumed to represent the midpoint of an interval instead of an absolute score. For example, a response of

3 (satisfied) was interpreted to indicate a midpoint of the interval 2.5 to 3.5. Four satisfaction categories

were obtained by multiplying the interval ranges by the number of items in each subscale. For instance, a

score of 5-7.5 indicated a Very Dissatisfied score for the subscale, whereas a subscale score of 17.5 or

above yielded a Very Satisfied rating. This same procedure was used for the overall sums of the 100 MSQ

items, creating ranges for total job satisfaction scores. Therefore, total sums of 100-150 indicate that the

respondent is Very Dissatisfied, 151-250 represented the Dissatisfied Range, 251-350 indicated Satisfied

results, and scores between 351 and 400 indicated that the participant was Very Satisfied.

To answer the research questions presented earlier, the following statistical analyses were

performed.

1. A frequency count based on the number of respondents in each overall job satisfaction

category was used to describe the overall level of job satisfaction of school psychologists.

2. Means and 95% confidence intervals were used for each of the 20 subscales on the MSQ to

conduct a hierarchy of job satisfaction sub-factors for the national sample of school

psychologists.

3. A multiple regression model was constructed to describe the relationships between the

selected demographic variables and overall job satisfaction.

4. A series of t-tests was used to compare the level of job satisfaction of school psychologists in

the 2002 and 1992 samples with the various subfactors of job satisfaction measured by the

MSQ.

5. Levels of overall job satisfaction of both groups were compared using a chi-square goodness

of fit test.
 34

Summary

This chapter provided a description of the research methods and the rationale for their use in this

study. Methodological strategies relating to participants, instrumentation, and data collection procedures

were discussed. Finally, the statistical treatments of the survey data were detailed.

Chapter IV

Results of the Study

This chapter presents the results of the data analysis procedures that were described in Chapter

III. The results of the data collection procedures are described in the first section. The demographic

description of the sample, as collected from the Data Form, is delineated in the second. The third section

describes the statistical properties of the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire. The fourth section is

devoted to the description of school psychologists' job satisfaction, which will restate the research

questions and be followed by the analysis that answers them. The chapter concludes with a summary of

the findings for each research question.

Survey Responses

Data were collected through a five-step process that included: (1) a pre-letter; (2) the initial

survey mailing; (3) a postcard reminder; (4) the first follow-up mailing of the survey materials; (5) the

second follow-up mailing of the survey materials. Five hundred survey packets were mailed initially.

Return percentages for each step in the data collection process are presented in Table 1 along with

those from Brown's 1992 study. The final response rate of 61.6% included 16 incomplete or otherwise

unusable surveys.

Demographic Data

Responses to items on the data form were used to describe the characteristics of the sample, and

to develop demographic variables for the study of relationships between demographic variables and job

satisfaction. All demographic characteristics are descriptive of those respondents who identified

themselves as full-time practitioners employed in schools (n=234).

Survey Response Rates

 35

Step Number % Total Number % Total

Initial Mailing 227 45.4 250 56.81

First Follow-up 60 12 53 12.04

Second Follow-up 21 4.2 56 12.72

Total 308 61.6 359 81.57

 36

Primary Role Designation

Two hundred and thirty four respondents identified their primary roles as a full-time practitioner

and were included in the analysis. This group comprised 79.3% of the useable responses to the survey. A

breakdown of the role designations of all respondents along with that of Brown's 1992 sample is

presented in Table 2. Gender

Twenty-two percent of the survey sample was comprised of males (n =54), while females made

up 76.8 % of the sample (n =179). Age

The number of respondents in each age category is presented in Table 3 along with that of

Brown's 1992 and Anderson's 1982 sample. The largest percentage of respondents in the present sample

was in the 50-55 year-old range, making up 24.7% (n =58) of the survey sample. In fact, almost half of all

respondents (46.9 %; n =110) indicated that they were 50 years-old or over.

Degree Status

The percentage of respondents at each level of degree is shown in Table 4. The majority of the

participants (67.6 %; n =159) reported holding the Masters degree plus 30 semester hours or an

Educational Specialist degree, while 26% of the respondents reported holding the doctorate degree (n

=60). Co-Workers

Of the 235 persons responding to this item, less than 1% indicated they worked in a school

system employing no full-time school psychologists (n =2). Twenty-five percent of

Primary Role Designation

Category__________________________Number % Total___________________Number % Total

Practitioner 234 79.3 228 66.7

Administrator/Supervisor 25 8.5 27 7.9

Student 0 0 -- --

Full Time Intern 0 0 -- --

Trainer of School Psychologists 5 1.7 15 4.4

Private Practitioner 11 3.7 21 6.1

Retired/ Not Practicing/ Other 20 6.8 45 13.2

 37

Table 1

Total 308 100 359 100.0

2004 1992
Age Distribution

Range________Number % Total____________Number % Total____________Number % Total

20-25 0 0 0 0% 1 .4%

26-31 18 8.1% 26 11.5% 61 25.0%

32-37 35 14.9% 34 15.0% 75 30.7%

38-43 31 13.2% 71 31.4% 38 15.6%

44-49 40 17.1% 60 26.5% 27 11.0%

50-55 58 24.7% 16 7.1% 19 7.8%

56-61 39 16.6% 15 6.6% 17 7.0%

Over 62 13 5.6% 4 1.8% 6 2.5%

Total 235 100% 226 100% 244 100%

Note. Two respondents failed to complete this item for 1992 and one respondent failed to answer this item

for 1982.
 38

Table 4

Degree Status

2004 1992 1982

Degree________Number % Total Number % Total Number % Total

1BS .4% 0 0% 0 0%

MS 6.4% 20 111 8.8% 29 151 11.8%

15
MS + 30 103 43.8% 44 52 48.9% 35 30 61.6%

Ed.S./CAGS 56 23.8% 19.4% 14.3%

Doctorate 60
25.5% 22.9% 12.2%

Total 235 100% 227 100% 245 100.0%

 39

respondents reported working in a school system employing 1 to 3 full-time school psychologists (n =60),

and 19.6% persons indicated that they worked with 4-6 other school psychologists (n=46). School

systems employing 7-10 school psychologists made up 15.3% of the survey sample, while 7.7% of

respondents reported working with 11-14 other school psychologists. Respondents who indicated working

with more than 15 other school psychologists made up 30% of the survey sample (n=72). District

More than half (n =118, 50.6%) of the survey participants indicated that they were employed in a

suburban school district. Those working in rural areas made up 26.6% of the sample, and 22.7% of the

respondents reported working in urban areas. Supervisor Certification Status

Of the 232 persons who responded to this item, 66.8% (n =155) indicated that their

supervisor was not certified as a school psychologist. The remaining 33.2% of respondents reported

that their supervisor was certified. DSM-IV Importance and Usage

The majority of practicing school psychologists in this study 67.8% (n =160) reported that it is

important for school psychologists to use the DSM-IV in their jobs. Slightly less (66.5%, n =157)

respondents indicated that they actually use the diagnostic manual in their school service. The three

participants who thought it was important to use the DSM-IV but indicated that they did not, also reported

that they were not allowed to do so in their school division.

Computer Based Report Writers

Only 25.1% of the school psychologists surveyed indicated that they use computer based report

writer programs in their jobs. The majority (74.9%, n =173) indicated that they do not utilize report writer

programs. Curriculum Based Assessment

The majority of survey participants (72%) rely on traditional standardized tests to evaluate

children in their schools. Only 25.4% (n =60) of respondents indicated that they utilize curriculum based

measurement practices for evaluating students. Hand-written comments on the data forms often suggested

that practitioners desired this form of assessment, but limitations placed on them by special education

laws and their individual school policies often prevented them form doing so. Psychologist-to-Student

Ratios
 40

Of the 231 persons responding to this item, 25% indicated that they work in school districts that

have a psychologist-to-student ratio of 1:1000 or less (n =59). Twenty-four percent of respondents (n

=58) reported a psychologist-to-student ratio between 1:1000 and 1:1500, while 20% reported a ratio

between 1:1500 and 1:2000 (n =58). The remaining 30% of respondents reported psychologist-to-student

of more than 1:2000 and the entire breakdown of responses to this item are presented in Table 5. Annual

Salary

The annual salary distribution is presented in Table 6 along with the salary data gathered in 1992

and 1982. To maintain consistency, the top salary bracket is presented in the table as $50,000 and over.

With that in mind, the largest group of respondents earned over $50,000
 41

Table 5

1992 1982
Psychologist-to-Student Ratio

2004
Number % Total Number % Total Number % Total
Ratio
59 25.1% 31 13.7% 33 13.6%
1:1000 or less

36 15.9% 29 12.0%

60 26.5% 45 18.6%

35 15.5% 43 17.8%

33 14.6% 35 14.5%

14 6.2% 21 8.7%

9 4.0% 11 4.5%

8 3.5% 25 10.3%

1:1000 to 1:1500 58 24.7%

1:1500 to 1:2000 48 20.4%

1:2000 to 1:2500 35 14.9%

1:2500 to 1:3000 12 5.1%

1:3000 to 1:3500 7 3.0%

1:3500 to 1:4000 3 1.3%

1:4000 or over 10 4.3%

Total 232 100% 228 100% 242 100.0%

Note. Three respondents failed to complete this item in 2004 and in 1982.
 42

Table 6

Annual Salary

2004 1992 1982

Range________ Number % Total Number % Total Number % Total

28.1 or less 015

0% 6.6% 193 80.1%
9.1%
22
28.2 to 30,000 020
0% 8.8%
6.2%
15
30,001 to 32,000 012
0% 5.3%
1.7%
4
32,001 to 34,000 217
0.9% 7.5%
.4%1
34,001 to 36,000 111
0.4% 4.8%
.4%1
36,001 to 38,000 112
0.4% 5.3%
2.1%
5
38,001 to 40,000 119
0.4% 8.3%
0.0%
0
40,000 to 50,000 20
8.5%
80 35.1%
0.0%
0
50,000 or over 208
89.2%
42 18.4%

Total 232 100% 228 100% 241 100.0%

Note. Two respondents failed to complete this item in 2004 and four respondents failed to

complete this item in 1982.

annually (89.2%, n =208) while 8.5% of the sample earned between $40,000 and $50,000 per

year (n =20). Only 2.1% of the respondents made less than $40,000 annually.

To characterize the top salary bracket more specifically, 15.8% (n =37) of the

respondents reported earning between $50,000 and $60,000 per year, while 24.6% (n =58) of the

survey sample indicated that they earned between $60,000 and $70,000 per year. The remaining

15.7% of respondents (n =37) reported earning more than $71,000 per year. Administrative Roles

Most participants in this study (82.7%, n =191), reported that they did not seek an

administrative position. When asked about teaching requirements for administrative roles in their

systems, 17% indicated that they were unsure of whether or not one must be a teacher before

advancing into administration. Of those who did respond to the question, 53%(=125), thought
 43

Table 6

that teaching experience was not a prerequisite for an administrative position in their school

divisions. Contract Length

Sixty-one percent (n =145) of the persons responding to this item indicated that they

were employed for 10 month contracts, while 16.6% of the survey sample reported working for a

9 month contract (n =39). Eleven month contracts were held by 11.1% of the survey sample

(n=26), and 12 month contracts were held by 10% of the respondents (n=24). Years of

Experience

The number of years of experience as a school psychologist ranged from 1 to 37, with

50% reporting less than 14 years of experience. The complete breakdown of this item is reported

in Table 7.
Years of Experience
Years of Experience

2004 1992 1982

Years_________Number % Total________Number % Total____________Number %

Total

0-5 29 12.3 60 26.5 103 42.9

6-10 47 20.2 47 20.8 79 32.9

11-15 53 22.9 53 23.5 33 13.8

16-20 34 14.6 43 19.0 20 8.3

21-25 26 15.3 22 9.7 3 1.3

26-30 34 146 1 04 2 0_J5

Total 233 100.0 226 100.0 240 100.0

Note. Two respondents failed to complete this item in 2004 and 1992, and five respondents failed

to complete this item in 1982.

National Certification Status

 44

Table 6

Of the 232 persons responding to this item, 53% reported holding the National Certified

School Psychologist designation (n=123), while 47% indicated that they did not hold the national

certification (n=109). Psychology Licensure

The majority of the respondents (n=145, 62.2%) indicated that they were not licensed as

a school psychologist. Those reporting that they were licensed to practice psychology made up

37.8% of the survey sample (n=88), while one respondent failed to answer this item. Private

Practice

Of the 233 persons responding to this item, only 20.4% (n=48) reported providing private

practice services in addition to their employment in the school systems Remain in Current

Position

When asked if they intended to stay in their current employment position for at least five

more years, 70.2% of the survey sample (n=165) indicated that they plan to do so. Only 28.1%

(n=66) reported that they did not plan to remain in their position, while four persons failed to

answer this item. Remain in the Profession

The data form also asked participants if they planned to remain in the field of school

psychology for the next five years. The majority of the respondents indicated that they do intend

to say in the profession (n=195, 83.0%), whereas only 15.3% (n=36) plan to leave the profession

within the next five years. Of the 235 survey respondents, four failed to answer this question.

Teaching Experience

The majority of respondents in this sample (n=139, 59.9%) indicated that they had no

teaching experience. Respondents who reported having 1-5 years of teaching experience made up

24.5% (n=57) of the sample, while 10.4% of the participants reported having 6-10 years of

service as a teacher. Just over three percent had between 11-15 years of teaching experience, and

1.6 % (n=4) indicated that they had taught for more than 15 years.

Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ) Survey participants returned

234 completed Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaires. The questionnaire has been shown to

provide both reliable and valid information about job satisfaction of school psychologists.

Questionnaire Reliability
 45

Table 6

The internal consistency of the 20 scales of the MSQ is very good, and the median

reliability coefficients range from .78 to .93 (Weiss et. al., 1967). The internal consistency

estimates provided by the authors are presented in Table 8 along with Brown's 1992 reliability

coefficients for each of the 20 scales of the MSQ. Concurrent Validity

Concurrent validity was tested by using the overall job satisfaction rating from item 27

on the data form and the job satisfaction scores on the modified MSQ. A Pearson correlation

coefficient was calculated, and a moderate correlation that was significant was found (r = 381,

p>.01). Thus job satisfaction scores on the MSQ were related to personal estimates of job

satisfaction.
 46

Table 6

MSQ Median 1992

Reliability Coefficients for MSQ scales

Job Satisfaction Among School Psychologists

The modified 1977 version of the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ) was used

to measure job satisfaction among the national sample of NASP registered school psychologists.

The responses on the data forms, the summated MSQ scores, and the 20 scales that were
 47

Table 6

described in Chapter III form the basis of the results discussed below. The research questions

organize the following sections for ease of interpretation. Overall Job Satisfaction

Research Question 1: What is the overall level of job satisfaction reported by the national

sample of school psychologists?

Two measures were used to determine job satisfaction in this study. The first was

obtained from the last question on the data form that asked participants to rate their overall level

of job satisfaction on a scale of 1 to 4, with one being very dissatisfied and four being very

satisfied. Of the 234 survey participants, only 12 (5.1%) reported being very dissatisfied with

their position. Twenty-five (10.6%) of the respondents indicated that they were dissatisfied with

their current job. The majority of the sample (n=149; 63.7%) expressed that they were satisfied,

and forty-eight persons (20.5%) reported that they were very satisfied with their current position.

The second measure of job satisfaction was obtained by summing response rates across

all 100 items of the modified MSQ. This score was then converted into categorical data by

creating four satisfaction categories based on score intervals explained in Chapter III. Total sums

of 100-150 indicated that the respondent was Very Dissatisfied, 151-250 represented the

Dissatisfied interval range, 251-350 indicated Satisfied results, and scores between 351 and 400

indicated that the participant was Very Satisfied. Of the 233 survey participants, less than 1%

(n=1) fell in the very dissatisfied range. Nine percent of the respondents' (n=21) scores fell in the

dissatisfied range, while 83% (n=195) of the scores were within the satisfied range. The

remaining 7% (n=16) of the participants' scores fell in the very satisfied range. Sources of Job

Satisfaction

Research Question 2: What degree of job satisfaction do school psychologists report on

each of the 20 subscales of the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire?

Creating a hierarchy of the 20 scales of the modified MSQ allowed the investigation of

the sources of job satisfaction among the sample of school psychologists. Respondents expressed

satisfaction with 19 out of 20 areas (areas with mean ratings above 12.5). Only ratings on school

system policies and practices fell below this range, indicating that the participants as a whole
 48

Table 6

were dissatisfied with this aspect of their jobs. The detailed breakdown of the twenty modified

MSQ scales is provided in Table 9. Job Satisfaction and Demographic Variables

Research Question 3: What relationship, if any, do job satisfaction and the selected

demographic variables share?

As in Brown's 1992 study, multiple regression was used to determine the relationship

between selected demographic variables and overall job satisfaction. The regression model was

generated with SPSS v.9.0 (1988). The regression analysis incorporated a step-wise variable

selection process that utilized the eleven variables of gender, age, degree status, co-workers,

psychologist-to-student ratio, supervisor certification, national certification, psychology

licensure, private practice, intention to remain in the profession, and intent to remain in current

position.
Hierarchy of MSQ scales

Scale N Mean SD 95%CI

Social Service 233 16.704 2.888 16.33--17.08
Independence 229 16.013 2.053 15.75--16.28
Moral Values 231 16.013 2.219 15.73--16.30
Activity 233 15.953 2.388 15.65--16.26
Co-workers 233 15.931 2.656 15.59--16.27
Security 231 15.892 2.711 15.54--16.24
Responsibility 231 15.615 2.498 15.29--15.94
Achievement 233 15.571 2.870 15.20--15.94
Ability Utilization 233 15.485 3.500 15.03--15.94
Variety 233 15.142 2.870 14.77--15.51
Creativity 233 15.000 3.177 14.59--15.41
Authority 229 14.633 2.295 14.33--14.93
Social Status 228 14.491 2.353 14.18--14.80
Compensation 232 14.095 3.258 13.67--14.51
Supervision-Human Relations 232 13.961 3.730 13.48--14.44
Recognition 233 13.944 3.322 13.52-- 14.57
Working Conditions 233 13.794 3.327 13.37-- 14.22
Supervision-Technical 233 13.588 3.549 13.13-- 14.05
Advancement 225 12.636 3.000 12.24--13.03
Policies and Practices 233 12.305 3.177 11.90-- 12.72

The variables of gender, age, supervisor certification, national certification, psychology

licensure, private practice, intent to remain in the profession, and intent to remain in current

position are categorical, and were coded 0 or 1. Membership in a particular category was

signified with a 1, while 0 signified a no response or no membership to the group. The remaining

variables of degree status, co-workers, and psychologist-to-student ratio were also treated as
 49

Table 6

categorical, but each was comprised of more than two categories. All variables were dropped out

of the step-wise regression except the intent to remain in position and supervisor certification.

These two demographic variables were found to be related to increased job satisfaction,

explaining 8.9% of the total variance. The resulting model and the excluded variables are

summarized in Table 10.

In keeping with the 1982 and 1992 data analysis procedures, supplemental comparisons

of overall job satisfaction scores and selected demographic variables were also completed. These

comparisons utilized simple t tests and one-way analysis of variance to determine if there was a

significant difference in mean scores of variables relative to the overall levels of job satisfaction.

For example, using a standard t test, the job satisfaction mean of certified respondents (n =

294.074) was compared to the mean job satisfaction score of non-certified participants (n =

300.661). The resulting t score of -1.3 (df=228) was not significant, suggesting that there is no

statistically significant difference between the two groups. During this phase of analysis, only the

intent to remain in the profession was significant. The resulting t score of - 2.274 (df=228,

sig.=.024) suggests that there is a statistically significant difference between the two groups. This

variable was dropped out of the step-wise regression however, which likely means that intent to

remain in the position and intent to remain in the profession account for a similar or overlapping

portion of the overall variance.

 50

Table 10

Multiple Regression Summary

Source_______________Sum of Sq. df Mean Sq. F.

S
R 29184.670
14592.335 10.721
2
R
T 328635.1
299450.4
220 1361.138
V
I
R 222
S
R B SEEtof B

278.9094.952
56.323

18.762 5.462
3.435

3.160
5.247

.949
 51

Table 10

.
000 6

t
School
-
Psychol
Sig .
.
ogists
4
.
Job
6
0
Satisfac
2
tion:
.
Excluded P 0 Ten
2
Variables Years
4
Variable Later
8

- R

Gender esearch
.
0 Questio
4
Age n 4:
2
Degree How do
9
8 the
-
Co- current
.
Workers levels
1
09 of
3
Psych to school
9
Student psychol
-
Ratio ogists'
1
Nationally job
.
Certified
9 satisfact
104
6 ion
Licensed
7 compar
040

.949
 52

Table 10

e to the levels reported in the 1982 summarizes were

and 1992 national surveys? Brown's identica

Current job satisfaction regression model, l to

levels of the national sample of while the those in

NASP registered school replication of the 1982,

psychologists were compared to model using the indicati

levels reported by Brown in 1992 current data is ng that

and Anderson in 1982. Selected provided in Table social

demographic variables were 12. Using service,

examined along with the 20 Brown's 1992 moral

subfactors of the modified MSQ. model, only 6% values,

Overall job satisfaction scores were of the total and

also noted for the current sample, variance in job indepen

and comparisons were also made to satisfaction was dence

job satisfaction findings in the explained. remain

previous two studies. The the

The regression model used hierarchy of the areas of

in 1992 to compare relationships 20 MSQ highest

between overall job satisfaction subfactors was satisfact

scores and demographic variables very similar to the ion.

was replicated in the current study. hierarchy Areas

To complete this analysis generated from of

procedure, the previously significant Brown in 1992 dissatisf

variables of gender, private practice, and Anderson in action

national certification, and intent to 1982. In fact, the were

remain in position were recalculated top three areas of also

using the current data set. Table 11 job satisfaction comme

.949
 53

Table 10

nsurate to previous findings, and 7

although the order varied, the seven 1 Variabl

e B
lowest subfactors were the same as SE of B
F
those reported in 1982 and 1992.
Intercep
These areas of dissatisfaction
t 287.33
included policies and practices,
15.62
advancement, supervision-technical,
338.33
working conditions, recognition,
Gender
supervision-human relations, and
16.33
compensation.
5.11
Multiple Regression Summary:
Brown 1992
10.19

Nationa
S d S M F
l
.

R r Certific
4 29333.30
T 1
e ation
60

g 9.82
248049.5

r 5.80
454

e 2.87
277382.8

s Private
514

s Practice

i -9.95

o 6.04

n 2.71

E Remain

r i

r n

.949
 54

Table 10

P d .
T 2
os a

iti t
V
o a a 4
r
n -16.00 i 1
a
b N
5.81 S
l
e
7.57 o a
B
R u t
I
- r n i
t
S c e o
r
q e c n
e
u ____________________ p a
t
ar M l
2
8
e e 7
.
= a 0 C
0
. n 5 e

1 G r

0 S e

5 q n

7 . d

Replication of R 4 3 e

Brow r

n
-
1992
3
model
.
with
1
2004

.949
 55

Table 10

tification 6.015 Current Howev

5.416 .602 levels of overall er,

Private 5.027 job satisfaction because

Practice .283 were also the

Remain in 6.349 compared to actual

Position .317 those reported by data set

SE of B t
Sig 5.524 Brown in 1992 from

5.686 50.478 .001 and Anderson in the

.000 1982. The overall 1992

R-Square= .056 levels of job study

Subfactors of the satisfaction from was not

modified MSQ were all three samples availabl

compared using a series of are presented in e, a chi-

t-tests. The results of these Table 14 for ease square

analyses are presented in of comparison. analysis

Table 13. When compared To determine if was

to the 1992 sample, the current overall complet

current group of school job satisfaction ed by

psychologists was more scores are a good hand

satisfied with their fit to the expected The

opportunities to be creative frequencies of job resultin

on the job, the satisfaction scores g chi-

independence they have, found in Brown's square

and also the level of job 1992 study, a of

security they feel in their one-way ANOVA 5.604

positions. would have been suggest

preferable. s that

.949
 56

Table 10

the current data are a good fit to the supervisor

data evidenced in Brown's 1992 certification

study. The results of this analysis status.

are summarized in Table 15. Respondents

Summary indicating that

The results of the study

were presented in this chapter. The

data collection procedures yielded a

61.6% total response rate.

Demographic findings from the

Data Form were discussed, followed

by a description of the statistical

properties of the Minnesota

Satisfaction Questionnaire. School

psychologists' job satisfaction was

then addressed, and the results

indicated that 90.6% of the survey

participants were either satisfied or

very satisfied with their jobs. Within

the 20 scales of the MSQ, overall

dissatisfaction was only observed on Note. CV=3.02, twenty comparison t test, alpha =.05 (Howell, 1997).

the school system policies and t-test Analysis

practices scale. of2004 and 1992

Specific variables found to Studies' Scale

be significant predictors of job Scores

satisfaction included the intent to

remain in current position and the

.949
 57

Table 14

1982

Overall Job Satisfaction Scores utilizing 20 MSQ scales

2004 1992

Range Number % Total Number % Total Number % Total

Very Dissatisfied 1 .4 0 0 00

Dissatisfied 21 9.0 32 14 34 14.3

195 83.7 192 80.7
Satisfied Very 184 80.7

Satisfied 16 6.9 12 5.3 5.0

11

Total 232 100% 228 100.0% 237 100%

Note. Three respondents failed to complete all 20 scales in 2004

Goodness of Fit Comparison of Current and 1992 Data

Category ObservedExpectedResidual

x2= 5.604 (df=3).

 58

they planned on remaining in their position for at least five more years were more satisfied with their

jobs, as were those participants who reported that their immediate supervisor was a certified school

psychologist. These two variables accounted for approximately 9% of the total variance. Finally, the

results of the current study were compared to results found in 1982 and 1992. In general, the current

group of participants expressed very similar views of job satisfaction to those in the earlier nationwide

studies. Overall levels of job satisfaction and specific areas of satisfaction/dissatisfaction were both quite

consistent with the previous data. In comparison to the 1982 and 1992 studies, school psychologists in the

current sample are more satisfied with their job security, independence, and their opportunities to be

creative on the job. A discussion of the current findings in relation to the results from the previous two

studies is included in Chapter V.

Chapter V Discussion and Recommendations The findings are discussed in this chapter.

Chapter V includes a review the research questions, methodology employed, implications of the results

for the profession of school psychology, and recommendations for future research.

Review of the Research Questions and Methodology The purpose of this study was to

measure the job satisfaction of a national sample of NASP affiliated school psychologists. The procedures

employed were devised to answer each of the following research questions:

1. What is the overall level of job satisfaction reported by the national sample of school

psychologists?

2. What degree of job satisfaction do school psychologists report on each of the 20 subscales of

the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire?

3. What relationship, if any, do job satisfaction and the selected demographic variables

share?

4. How do the current levels of school psychologists' job satisfaction compare to the

levels reported in the 1982 and 1992 national surveys?

A random sample of 500 participants was selected from the National Association of School

Psychologists (NASP) database. Data collection was completed through a demographic data form and a

modified form of the 1977 Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ) that was distributed via U.S.
 59

Mail. After completing all five stages of mailings and follow-up, 308 persons (61.6%) had returned the

materials. Of this total, 234 were useable responses representing full-time school practitioners.

The 100 questions of the MSQ provided overall job satisfaction scores and 20 separate subfactors

of job satisfaction. Overall job satisfaction estimates were generated by converting total scores into four

intervals ranging from very dissatisfied to very satisfied. A hierarchy of the 20 subfactors was then

constructed to determine specific aspects of job satisfaction of the current sample. Then, step-wise

multiple regression was used to examine relationships between coded demographic data and overall job

satisfaction. Next, overall job satisfaction levels from the current sample were compared to those reported

in 1982 and 1992. Finally, a series of t-tests were employed to test for differences between the 1992 and

the current sample on each of the 20 subfactors of the MSQ.

Summary of Results and Conclusions The results of this study are

summarized in the following section for each of the research questions that formed the basis of this study.

1. What is the overall level of job satisfaction reported by the national sample of school

psychologists?

The current findings suggest that the majority of full-time, practicing school psychologists are

either satisfied or very satisfied with their current positions. These data were gathered through two

separate measures. The first was a question on the demographic data form that asked each participant to

rate their overall job satisfaction on a scale of 1-4. Then, overall job satisfaction scores were obtained by

summing the converted responses on the MSQ to an interval range. Self ratings from the data form

indicated that 63.7% of the respondents were satisfied, and 20.5% were very satisfied with their positions.

Overall job satisfaction scores generated from the MSQ were similar, with 83.7% of the respondents

being satisfied, and 6.9 % being very satisfied. A Pearson correlation coefficient was computed and found

to be .381

(p=.0001), pointing to a moderate statistical relationship between the two measures of job satisfaction.

2. What degree of job satisfaction do school psychologists report on each of the 20 subscales of

the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire?

Participants in this study were satisfied with 19 of the 20 subfactors of the modified MSQ. School

system policies and practices was the only subfactor that fell in the dissatisfied range.
 60

3. What relationship, if any, do job satisfaction and the selected demographic variables

share?

To evaluate the relationship between overall job satisfaction and eleven demographic variables

included on the data form, step-wise multiple regression was employed. Although the variables of gender,

certification, private practice, and intent to remain in current position were found to explain a significant

portion of the overall variance in the 1992 study, the intent to remain in current position and supervisor

certification status were the only significant predictors of job satisfaction in the current study. Females

and non-certified professionals were more satisfied with their jobs; however, the differences were

minimal and far from reaching significance.

4. How do the current levels of school psychologists' job satisfaction compare to the levels

reported in the 1982 and 1992 national surveys?

Overall levels of job satisfaction are high, and have remained stable over the past twenty years

(Reschly, 2000). Ninety percent of school psychologists in this study were either satisfied or very

satisfied with their jobs, showing little change from the 86% of scores in the 1992 study and the 85.7%

of scores in this range reported in 1982. The percentages of respondents who reported being

dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with their jobs was also similar, making up approximately 10% of the

current sample, 14% in the 1992 study, and 14.3% in the 1982 research. The vast majority of school

psychologists in all three studies were satisfied or very satisfied with their jobs.

Specific aspects of job satisfaction have also changed very little two decades, and all three studies

indicated that school psychologists were most satisfied with social service, moral values, independence,

responsibility, co-workers and activity. In fact, participants were satisfied or very satisfied with 19 out of

20 MSQ scales in the current sample. In both 1982 and 1992, 18 out of the 20 scales fell in the satisfied or

very satisfied range. Subfactors evidencing the lowest satisfaction scores were also consistent to the 1992

and 1982 studies, and policies and practices, advancement, working conditions, compensation,

recognition, supervision-human relations, and supervision-technical continue to be the least satisfying

aspects of the school psychologists' job. The current sample is more satisfied with their job security, their

independence, and their opportunities to be creative on the job than the sample groups in 1982 and 1992.

Discussion
 61

Overall Job Satisfaction

There is a good explanation for the on-going investigations of job satisfaction. Aside from the

humanistic and financial benefits of job satisfaction studies, it has been shown that when employees are

satisfied, they tend to care more about work quality, they show higher levels of organizational

commitment, they have higher retention rates, and they are generally more productive (Bravendam

Research Incorporated, 2002). Spector (1997) suggested that job satisfaction data is fundamental in

evaluating the emotional wellness and mental fitness of employees. In school systems, school

psychologists play a fundamental role in the educational

process, and maximizing their contributions and maintaining first rate services to the children is

extremely important.

Job satisfaction estimates for American workers typically indicate that 80 to 90 percent are either

satisfied or very satisfied with their jobs (Blanchflower & Oswald, 1999; Levinson & Dematteo,1998;

Brown, 1992). On the other hand, a very small portion of U.S. workers report that they are very

dissatisfied with their jobs.

To evaluate job satisfaction, a popular instrument has been the Minnesota Satisfaction

Questionnaire. The 1977 version of the MSQ has been modified in many of the studies of school

psychology to enhance the scale score distribution and to more accurately target the school psychologist's

job. This modified MSQ was used by both Brown in 1992 and Anderson in 1982 when they completed

nationwide job satisfaction studies of school psychologists. Their results were very similar to the general

job satisfaction scores of American workers, and they suggested that more than 85% of school

psychologists in their samples were either satisfied or very satisfied with their jobs. Their findings of

dissatisfaction were also consistent with the overall job satisfaction estimates in the United States, and no

respondents' job satisfaction score fell in the very dissatisfied range in the 1992 or 1982 samples.

Studies of school psychologists' job satisfaction have also been completed on a statewide level

and the findings have again been consistent with the national estimates. For example, previous studies in

Virginia and Pennsylvania have shown an 84% satisfaction rate (Levinson, 1983). Estimates have been

similar from North Carolina, with 79.83 % of the respondents reporting being satisfied or very satisfied

with their jobs (South, 1990).

 62

Reschly (2000) reported that overall job satisfaction of school psychologists is well above the

midpoint on Likert scale items. The current findings support this statement, showing 84.2%

satisfied or very satisfied ratings on the Likert scale overall job satisfaction question included on the data

form. Most respondents (84%) indicated that they planned on staying in the profession of school

psychology for at least five more years, showing high similarity to the 91.9% evidenced in the 1982

national study. Seventy-two percent of the current participants reported that they planned on staying in

their current position for at least five more years, which is again consistent with the 73.2% yielded in

1982

The findings from this research correspond well to findings from other national job satisfaction

studies of school psychologists, which consistently show high levels of career satisfaction. The current

estimate of 90% being satisfied or very satisfied is very similar to the 86% that was reported in 1992 and

1982 by Brown and Anderson respectively. State-wide studies have also shown high satisfaction scores,

although the range (64%-85%) has typically been broader (Solly and Hohenshil, 1986; Levinson,

Fetchkan, & Hohenshil, 1988). The explanation for the higher variability on state-wide studies is likely

linked to the economic conditions, legal requirements related to serving and/or evaluating children with

disabilities, and roles of other personnel within the school systems of the individual states (Lund et. al.,

1998). For example, Reschly (2000) reported that Texas, New Mexico, and Missouri all use educational

diagnosticians and school counselors to perform many services often provided by school psychologists.

This leads to less demand for school psychologists in some states, which in turn increases psychologist-

to-student ratio and deflates overall job satisfaction as illustrated by

Anderson (1982).

Factors Contributing to Job Satisfaction

Most job satisfaction studies evaluate numerous factors that may contribute to one's affective

appraisal of their work. These studies typically look at both the intrinsic features of a

job (e.g. recognition, advancement, and responsibility) and the extrinsic variables (e.g. salary,

supervision, and working conditions). In school psychology, being able to perform a social service, being

independent, performing a job that does not challenge one's moral values, being able to stay active, and

feeling accepted and appreciated by one's co-workers have been associated with higher levels of job
 63

satisfaction (Brown, 1992; Anderson, 1982). The same holds true for the current study, which shared

these top five areas of satisfaction with the previous nationwide studies.

In comparison to the earlier nationwide studies, school psychologists in the current sample are

more satisfied with their job security, independence, and their opportunities to be creative on the job. This

improvement is likely related to the fact that the demand for school psychologists has increased with legal

provisions associated with special education. Job security is also improved by the shortage of school

psychologists that has been documented since 1976 (Lund et. al.,1998). Security will likely rise even

higher as the shortage becomes more pronounced as a result of the existing population of school

psychologists maturing and retiring from their positions. The increase in creativity scores is perhaps

related to the fact that school psychologists are gradually being allowed to consider alternative practices

instead of traditional roles. Reschly (2000) comments that these alternative roles and practices are

emerging and gaining prominence.

Although the current findings and the findings from the previous two nationwide studies suggest

high satisfaction levels with most aspects of the school psychologists' job, specific areas of dissatisfaction

consistently emerge. Reschly (2000) suggested that the lack of promotional opportunity or career

advancement is the primary source of dissatisfaction among school psychologists, and this was true for

Anderson's 1982 sample. However, current data and

findings from the 1992 study show that lack of career advancement is secondary to policies and practices

when evaluating areas contributing to the most dissatisfaction of school psychologists. The difference

between the two factors has been negligible, and because both aspects are repeatedly shown to be areas of

dissatisfaction, each warrants additional discussion.

Previous studies have repeatedly shown that local and state administrative policies influence

satisfaction with work (Herzberg, Mausner, Peterson, and Capwell, 1957; Bacharach, Bamberger, &

Mitchell, 1990; Fournet, Distefano, & Pryer, 1969; Kendrick, Chandler, & Hatcher, 1994; Ponec &

Brock, 2000). When school psychologists are dissatisfied with school system policies and practices, they

tend to have lower job satisfaction (Anderson, Hohenshil, & Brown, 1984; Levinson, 1989, Levinson,

Fetchkan & Hohenshil, 1988; Solly and Hohenshil,

1986).
 64

When examining school system policies and practices, the dissatisfaction appears to be linked to

the fact that local and state administrative policies are often decided without input from the psychologists,

and these policies may ultimately restrict the roles of school psychologists Levinson (1990). Perhaps

more importantly to the dissatisfaction with polices and practices is the discrepancy between what school

psychologists are trained to do, and what they actually are expected or required to do by the school

system. For example, school psychologists entering the field in the new millennium may be expecting a

broad job role that allows them to provide one-on-one counseling services or permits them to perform

curriculum based assessments instead of traditional standardized tests. However, special education

legislation and litigation, stringent local budgets, and poor communication often seem to dictate the roles

of the practicing school psychologist. The resulting discrepancy between ideal role and actual role has

been addressed in literature and discussed in training programs for almost 50 years, and the role

preferences appear

to have changed very little over time. Reschly (1998) suggested that as a whole, school psychologists

desire to perform fewer traditional psycho-educational assessments, and instead focus more time on direct

intervention, problem-solving consultation, organizational consultation and applied research.

Many studies have shown that poor opportunity for advancement is related to job dissatisfaction

(Herzberg, Mausner, Peterson, & Capwell 1957; Anderson, Hohenshil, & Brown, 1984; Levinson, 1983;

Levinson, Fetchkan & Hohenshil, 1988, South, 1990; Solly and Hohenshil, 1986). In studies of school

counselors, Kirk (1988) and Murray (1995) found that advancement opportunity ranked 19 th out of 20

scales contributing to job satisfaction. In the current study, opportunity for advancement also ranked 19 th

out of 20 scales, as it did in Brown's 1992 research. In studies of job satisfaction in Virginia (Levinson,

Fetchkin & Hohenshil, 1988) also reported advancement as a primary source of dissatisfaction. Merchant

(1983) reported that school psychologists who indicated they were dissatisfied with their jobs often

commented that their role was limited to that of a psychometrician.

The source of this on-going dissatisfaction with promotional opportunities stems partially from

the fact that the position of school psychologist is considered both an entry level and terminal position

((Brown, 1992; Anderson, 1982; Levinson & Hohenshil, 1987). In larger school systems where a team of

school psychologists may be employed, some school psychologists may have the opportunity to advance
 65

into a director role. However, school districts employing more than seven school psychologists that

would perhaps require a supervisor make up only 23% of the sample surveyed. A second opportunity for

advancement for the school psychologist may be to an administrative position. Yet this option may

require teaching experience, a prerequisite that the majority of the current sample do not have.

Furthermore, most school psychologists surveyed (82.2%) indicated that they did not desire to hold an

administrative position in the future.

Some studies have speculated that administrative duties are perhaps too far detached from the

practice of school psychology, while others suggest that the teaching requirement hinders the

advancement of school psychologists into these administrative roles. Although the current study did not

investigate the rationale behind the dissatisfied advancement ratings, the lack of promotional options was

not significantly related to overall job satisfaction. What's more, the impact of these advancement issues

inherent to the position do not appear to be great; an assumption drawn from the 84% of the current

sample who wish to remain school psychologists despite being generally dissatisfied with this aspect of

the job. Demographic Variables and Job Satisfaction

In the 1992 nationwide job satisfaction studies of school psychologists, gender, intent to remain

in position, national certification, and private practice combined to account for a small but significant

portion of the overall variance (10.5%). In the 1982 study, age and psychologist-to-student ratio

combined to account for 8.6% of the total variance. In the current study, only intent to remain in position

and supervisor certification were found to be significant, accounting for a small but significant 8.9% of

the total variance. When the current data was inserted into the regression model used in 1992, 5.6% of the

total variance was explained, with intent to remain in position being the only significant variable,

accounting for 4.7% of the total variance in Brown's model. The lack of significant findings in most

demographic areas in the current study is not alarming. When the vast majority of overall satisfaction

scores fall in the satisfied or very satisfied range, it is often challenging to identify individual factors that

account for the overall positive satisfaction ratings.

Despite the fact that gender showed no significant relationship to job satisfaction, the frequency

of males to females appears to be a trend worthy of discussion. In the previous two nationwide studies,

the ratio of women to men was approximately 60:40. The current sample was much more skewed, with
 66

76.8% of respondents being female and 22% being male. This may simply suggest that women were more

likely to take the time to participate in the survey, or it may point to a significant gender shift in the

profession. Women in the study were more likely to have teaching experience, possibly suggesting that

more teachers are choosing to advance into a higher paying, non-teaching, and perhaps central office

based job. Men on the other hand, may be frustrated with the lack of advancement or the lack of power

that often is associated with a support services type position, and may instead be choosing to move into

private practice or some other non-school setting.

One demographic that appears unchanged in the past decade is private practice providers. Twenty

percent of both the 1992 and the current survey sample reported providing some private practice services.

These services are likely sought to supplement school psychologists income, but some would suggest that

these services allow practitioners to function more within their ideal role, and enable them to try creative

new ideas or to provide more counseling services.

School Psychologists Job Satisfaction-Past and Present

Overall job satisfaction has changed very little over the past twenty years. Consistent with the

previous two estimates of 85%, current findings indicate that 90.6% of the survey participants reported

being satisfied or very satisfied with their jobs. Similarly, 19 out of the 20 MSQ subscales fell in the

satisfied or very satisfied range, which is not unlike the participants in the 1982 and 1992 studies that

were satisfied with 18 out of 20 scales. The current hierarchy of MSQ scales is also virtually identical to

the earlier findings, with social service, independence,

moral values, activity, and co-workers consistently being the top five areas of satisfaction. The areas of

dissatisfaction are also remarkably consistent, and the bottom seven scales in each study included policies

and practices, advancement, compensation, supervision-technical, working conditions, recognition, and

supervision-human relations.

Specific demographic variables were generally not found to be predictive of overall job

satisfaction, although intent to remain in position and supervisor certification status did account for a

small but significant portion of the overall variance. The frequency of respondents indicating that they did

plan to remain in their position was essentially the same as it was a decade ago, from 73% in 1992, to
 67

72% in the current sample. Intent to remain in the profession was also very similar, with 84% answering

yes in 1982, 91% in 1992, and 84% in the current study.

The distribution of gender seems to be much more skewed than it has in the past, perhaps

indicating a shifting trend in the field. Reschly (2000) speaks to this issue, and suggests that increasing

proportions of women have entered the field in the past two decades. He states further that in the 1970's,

gender distribution was relatively even, but since then the proportion of women in the field has grown

about 10% per decade. The current distribution showing 76% women is very close to his estimation of

80% that was derived from evaluating graduate students entering the profession. The current finding is

also quite consistent with the data reported by Curtis et. al.(2002) which suggests that approximately 70%

of all school psychologists and 72% of all school practitioners were female.

Another change appears to be in the area of supervision. Whereas 42% of the 1992 sample

reported being supervised by a certified school psychologist, only 33.2% of the respondents in the present

study answered yes to this question. In the 1982 study the

qualifications of participants' supervisor was not included on the data form. Because the number of

certified supervisors have decreased since 1992 while overall satisfaction ratings have increased, it is

possible that Brown's assumption that school psychologists are growing more satisfied perhaps because

more and more supervisors are becoming certified, is inaccurate.

Age seems to be another variable that is evolving in the field of school psychology. Reschly

(2000) suggests that the median age of practitioners has increased dramatically in the past 15 years. This

assumption is supported by the current findings, which also demonstrate the continuing advancement in

the chronological maturity of the field. In 1982, 56% of the sample was less than 37 years old. In 1992,

only 26% of the respondents were younger than 37, and in the current group only 22.1% fell in this age

range. Practitioners over age 50 constituted only 15% of the 1992 sample, whereas 46.9% of the current

sample reported being over 50 years old. Curtis et. al (1999) suggested that this increasing age trend is

moderate, and his findings showed less than a 5% increase in practitioners over age 50 between 1990 and

1995 (from 20% to 23.4%). Curtis et. al.(2002) later reported that practitioners above 50 years of age

increased 12.6% (from 20.2% to 32.8%) between 1990 and 2000. The current study supports Reschly's

notion that the increase in age of practitioners is a significant trend in the field. The population of the
 68

United States is also growing older however, and this pattern may not be limited to the field of school

psychology. Regarding age and its relationship to job satisfaction, Brown's assumption that older

employees are more satisfied may be supported by the current findings that show an older population and

higher satisfaction scores.

Salary seems to vary substantially depending on the employer of the school psychologist. Those

working in the private sector may earn much more than practitioners in public schools. Reschly (2000)

suggests that about 85% of school psychologists are employed by public schools,

an estimate that is very close to the 79.3% evidenced in the current study. Reschly goes on estimate that

the median salary for a school psychologist in the United States is approximately $50,000 per year. When

considering salary, increases are generally inevitable when looking at numbers ten or twenty years ago. In

the current study, the salary question on the demographic data form was expanded from $50,000+ in 1992

to $71,000 and over in the current study. However, the response pattern suggests that this category

expansion should have been broader. In 1982, no survey participants reported earning more than $50,000

per year, whereas 18.4% of the 1992 study made at least $50,000 yearly. In the current sample, 89.2%

made more than $50,000, with 15% making in excess of $71,000 per year.

Trends in degree status initially showed significant increases from 1982 to 1992. Brown reported

that 41% of his sample held the educational specialist or doctorate, indicating a significant increase from

the 26% noted by Anderson in 1982. Similar increases were noted when looking only at doctorate level

respondents, increasing from approximately 12% in 1982 to 25% in 1992. These findings would lead

many to predict that a majority of school psychologists would hold the doctorate in the near future

(Brown, 1989). Fagan (1986) agreed with the prediction, and further speculated that by 2010, one-half of

practitioners would hold the doctorate degree. For that prediction to be accurate, the number of doctorate

level school psychologists would have to double in the next six years. This is highly unlikely when

considering that doctorate level practitioners have only increased 2.5% in the past 12 years.

Licensure as a psychologist was reported to be held by 35.5% of all respondents in a study by

Curtis et. al.(2002). This estimate was again supported by the current research findings in which 37.3%
 69

indicated holding licensure. In 1992, only 26.9% of the sample was licensed, perhaps showing an

increasing rate of licensure among practicing school psychologists.

Psychologist-to-student ratio appears to be another changing trend in the field of school

psychology. Although this factor did not have a significant relationship with job satisfaction, it was also

insignificant in the 1992 data. In 1982, only 61% of the sample worked in school divisions with

psychologist-to-student ratio of 1:2500 or less. This increased to 71% in 1992 and current data suggests

that 85.1% of the current sample has a psychologist-to-student ratio of 1:2500 or less. Reschly (2000)

indicates that the national average for psychologist-to-student ratio in public school settings is 1:1930, but

that vast differences exist in state-to-state comparisons. He also reports that this factor has a vital

influence on school psychology practices in public schools.

Implications of the Study The results of this study have implications

that may prove to be valuable to school psychologists, university training programs, school divisions, and

professional organizations. The following section is devoted to these implications.

1. The overwhelming majority of school psychologists in this study were satisfied or very

satisfied with their jobs. There were also satisfied with 19 out of the 20 scales on the

modified MSQ. In comparison with the two previous nationwide studies, school

psychologists' overall job satisfaction appears to be equal to or higher than levels reported in

the 1992 or 1982. Specific areas of satisfaction targeted by the m-MSQ have also remained

virtually identical, and therefore school psychology appears to remain a profession that

provides practitioners with a satisfying occupational role.

2. The majority of school psychologists surveyed indicated that they plan to remain in their

position for at least five more years. An even greater portion of the respondents

reported that they planned on staying in the profession of school psychology for at least five more

years. The estimates are very similar to those evidenced in 1992, suggesting that most school

psychologists employed in public school settings are pleased with their careers, and plan to remain

in their current position for at least five more years.

3. Opportunities for advancement in the field of school psychology continue to be an area of

dissatisfaction. However, the lack of promotional options available do not significantly contribute to
 70

job dissatisfaction as they once did. Some may argue that this is due to more practitioners providing

outside services such as private practice that allows them to do more of the things they find

satisfying. This theory was not supported by the fact that overall job satisfaction and satisfaction

with opportunities for advancement both increased since 1992, yet less than a one percent increase

of private practice services was noted. Another argument might be that more practitioners are

transitioning into administrative roles that lead to higher overall satisfaction and also satisfaction

with their opportunities for advancement. This was again unlikely, due to the insignificant change of

those seeking administrative roles, and the consistency of those desiring to stay in their current

position and the profession. Perhaps the consistently lower scores on opportunities for advancement

in previous studies have stimulated discussion in university training programs. It is possible that

school psychologists emerging from training programs are more aware and informed of the limited

opportunities that their career may hold. Based on this assumption, school psychologists may

continue to indicate that they do not like this

aspect of their job, but their awareness of the issue before they entered the field has led them to not use

this factor as a basis for overall job satisfaction. 4. School psychologists continue to be dissatisfied with

their school system policies and practices. Since the mid 1970's mandatory special education legislation

has arguably had the most significant impact on the roles and functions of school psychologists. This

legislation is generally decided by federal and state governments, and school systems are often forced to

implement changes with little or no input from the school psychologist. These forced role changes

associated with educational legislation may be at the root of the dissatisfaction expressed in this area.

Another possibility for the dissatisfaction with policies and practices may also be related to the fact that

the majority of school psychologists are not supervised by a certified school psychologist. The results of

this study show that job satisfaction increases when a supervisor is a certified school psychologist. When

an immediate supervisor is not operating within the same profession, it is possible that their professional

priorities and values are different. An administrator may operate with the assumption that the parents and

taxpayers are the clients, whereas the school psychologist may feel that children are the top priority.

Regardless of the source, school psychologists' dissatisfaction with polices and practices needs further

investigation. If the cause is primarily the on-going legislation changes that will be difficult to
 71

manipulate, then perhaps university training programs should focus on education and awareness, and

encourage flexibility to adjust to the ever-changing roles that are often associated with legislation and

school system policies.

5. The demographic make-up of school psychologists in the United States shows several changing

trends. First, the amount of women in the field of school psychology continues to increase, and the

current ratio of women to men is approximately 4 to 1. Secondly, school psychologists as a whole are

growing older, and a disproportionate percentage of the population is approaching retirement.

Thirdly, more school psychologists are becoming licensed than they have in the past, yet no real

change in private practice services was noted. Finally, less school psychologists report being

supervised by a certified school psychologist than they did ten years ago. This is noteworthy and

perhaps even contradictory, because this factor was significantly positively related to overall job

satisfaction, yet even though the number of certified supervisors decreased, the overall job

satisfaction and the satisfaction with the various aspects of supervision targeted by the MSQ all

increased.

6. No significant increase in educational level was noted in the current study despite predictions ten or

twenty years ago that suggested practitioners holding the doctorate degree would dramatically

increase. About one out of four school psychologists in the public school setting hold the doctorate

degree and this remains essentially unchanged in the past 10 years.

7. The school psychologist-to-student ratio appears to be improving over time. Although most school

systems still exceed the NASP recommended ratio of 1000:1, the improvements are steady at a rate of

about 1% per year. Utilizing the current findings, one might speculate that by the year 2030, the

majority of school psychologists will be employed in schools that have the ideal 1:1000 ratio.

However, some researchers speculate that the ratio improvements will subside and possibly

reverse in the coming years due to an anticipated shortage of school psychologists. This predicted

shortage is logical when considering the increasing legal requirements related to children with

disabilities, the aging population of school psychologists who are approaching retirement, and the

insufficient number of school psychologists currently entering the field.

 72

Recommendations for the Profession

1. The vast majority of school psychologists continue to be satisfied with their jobs. With anticipated

workforce shortages and a seemingly constant flow of legislation that increases demand for school

psychology services, professional organizations and university training programs should use these

findings for recruitment purposes. The findings may also be helpful to high school counselors who

often educate and help guide college-bound students into promising careers. With a predicted

shortage of school psychologists, it could also be predicted that the ratio of students to school

psychologists could increase. The higher the ratio, the less time a school psychologist can devote to

preferred professional practices. Therefore, in addition to recruitment, these findings should be shared

with legislators and policymakers who may be unaware of the importance of the ratio of students to

school psychologists as a determinant of the nature of the services that school psychologists provide.

2. The limited opportunities for advancement are an on-going source of dissatisfaction for school

psychologists. Although no significant increases in promotional options have been noted in the field,

practitioners are reporting less dissatisfaction with this aspect of their jobs. The change perhaps is the

product of university training programs that discuss pitfalls of the profession before the students

become

practitioners. Some may argue that career ladders and job enrichment practices are needed to increase the

satisfaction in this area, but conveying and embracing the notion that school psychology is generally an

entry level and terminal position may be the most viable option at this time. 3. School system policies

and practices is another consistent source of job

dissatisfaction. Perhaps more research in this domain is needed to determine why this aspect of the

job is one of the most problematic for school psychologists. Communication may be a significant

factor in this domain, and maybe practitioners would be more satisfied if they felt included in local

policy making decisions. Perhaps school board or administrative meetings discussing the

implementation of new special education laws should include school psychologists. Better yet, school

psychologist lobbying groups should perhaps inform lawmakers of the implications of their decisions

before they become laws. However, it appears that changes related to special education laws and

other educational aspects are inevitable, and school divisions will likely be forced to change as well.
 73

Communication will certainly be helpful in making and implementing any change, but the changes

will likely be made regardless. Thus, it seems logical to prepare future school psychologists for the

inevitable. Perhaps new school psychologists would express less frustration in this area if they had

been prepared for the reality of the profession. Change will undoubtedly come, and legal

requirements and local economics will exert tremendous influence on the roles and functions of the

school psychologists. The prospective school psychologist should understand that one week may be

consumed with traditional standardized testing, and the passing of a law may mean the next week will

include only functional assessments or assessments based on the curriculum. The scenario is not an

exaggerated fairy-tale, but a reality that some localities have experienced. In these specific localities,

Reschly (2000) stated that a "revolution" of school psychology roles has occurred. Thus, university

training programs may want to encourage flexibility and creativity, and stress the importance of

being able to adapt to the changing demands that will most certainly be faced in the dynamic

profession of school psychology.

Recommendations for Future Research

1. This research marks the third nationwide study of school psychologists. The past two decades of

school psychologists have been sampled, and a solid baseline of job satisfaction has emerged. As

school systems evolve through the new millennium and legislation becomes increasingly more

prevalent, it will be interesting to evaluate job satisfaction in another ten years.

2. Research on the growing disproportion of women to men in the field may be helpful to training

programs, professional organizations, and recruiting agencies. The trend is far too pronounced to be

a product of chance, and it would be interesting to investigate why this ratio continues to diverge.

3. Investigation into desired promotional scales or career ladder programs within the field of school

psychology may enable future psychologists to ultimately put to rest the issue of dissatisfaction with

advancement opportunities.

4. Reschly (2000) said that "no data exists on job satisfaction of school psychologists in non-school

settings" (p.512). In this replication study, only school practitioners were

 74

included. This disregarded more than 20% of the returned survey materials. There is an

enormous amount of information that remains unused and the data may hold valuable

information about job satisfaction of other facets of school psychology. To illustrate, a t-test

was used to compare the overall job satisfaction of school practitioners versus the remaining

six service categories listed on the data form. Although no significant differences were found

in most areas, respondents who classified their primary role as "other" were significantly

more satisfied with their jobs. Further analysis may reveal the reason for this finding, and the

future research possibilities are immense.

5. In the current study, roles were evaluated by asking the respondent to estimate the approximate

number of hours per week they spend performing each task. The resulting data is difficult to

compare to other research findings due to the structure of the question. In the future, research

should ask about the number of evaluations completed per week or per year instead of asking

the number of hours allocated each week to the given task. For example, knowing that a

respondent performs ten psycho-educational assessments per week would be much more

helpful and relevant to the existing body of literature than knowing that they spend 10 hours

per week testing students.

Summary

This chapter has provided a discussion of the results from this nationwide study of NASP

registered school psychologists. The research replicated studies from 1982 and 1992, and the data shows

that most school psychologists continue to be satisfied with their profession and their

jobs. Implications of the findings were discussed, followed by recommendations for training programs,

departments of education, professional organizations, and school systems. Finally, recommendations for

future studies were offered for consideration.

 75

References

Accel-Team.com (2002). Elton Mayo's Hawthorne experiments into employee motivation and

workplace productivity. Retrieved from the World Wide Web on September 20, 2002

from www.accel-team.com. Adams, J.S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In L. Berkowitz

(Ed.)., Advances -

Experimental Social Psychology (vol. 2). New York: Academic Press. Aherns, R.H. (1977). Role

conflict and job satisfaction in school, institutional, and private

practice. Dissertation Abstracts International, 37, 7619a-7602a. American Counseling

Association. (1999, June). Washington update: 100,000 new counselors

amendment voted on. Counseling Today, p. 1. Anderson, W.T. (1982). Job satisfaction among

school psychologists. Dissertation Abstracts

International, 44, 1, DA 8310691. Anderson, W.T., Hohenshil, T.H., & Brown, D.T. (1984). Job

satisfaction among practicing

school psychologists: A national study. School Psychology Review, 13, 225-230. Arnold, J. B. &

Dodge, H. W. (1994). Room for all: Confused about inclusion? Here's a tip:

Educating disabled and non-disabled children together can be beneficial to both. The

American School Board Journal. 181 (10). 22-26. Arnold, N.L., Seekins, T., & Nelson, R.E.

(1997). A comparison of vocational rehabilitation

counselors: rural and urban differences. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 41, 2-14. Ary, D.,

Jacobs, L. & Razavieh, A. (1990). Introduction to research in education. Fort Worth:

Harcourt Brace.

Barbash, J. (1976). Job Satisfaction Attitudes Surveys. Paris: Organization for Economic

Cooperation and Development.

Balzer, W. K., Kihm, J. A., Smith, P. C., Irwin, J. L., Bachiochi, P. D., Robie, C., Sinar, E. F.,

& Parra, L. F. (1997). Users' manual_for the Job Descriptive Index (JDI; 1997 Revision)

and the Job In General scales. Bowling Green, OH: Bowling Green State University. Bacharach,

S. B., Bamberger, P., & Mitchell, S. (1990). Work design, role conflict, and role

ambiguity: The case of elementary and secondary schools. Educational Evaluation and
 76

Policy Analysis, 12, (4), 415-432. Barker, B. O. (1986) The advantages of small schools. (Report

No. RC 015-607). Las Cruces,

NM. Eric Clearing House of Rural Education and Small Schools. (Eric Document

Reproduction Service No. ED 265-988).

Black, M.M. & Holden, E. W. (1998). The impact on productivity and satisfaction among

medical school psychologists. Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings, 5 (1),

117-131.

Blanchflower, D. & Oswald, A. (1999). Well-being insecurity, and the decline of American job

satisfaction. Paper presented at Cornell Univeristy Conference in May 1999. Retrieved

from the World Wide Web on March 3, 2004 from

http://www.dartmouth.edu/~blnchflr/papers/JobSat.pdf. Bravendam Research Incorporated

(2002). Effective management through measurement: Special

report. Retrieved from the World Wide Web on September 20, 2002 from

http://www.employeesatisfactions.com/ Brown, M. (1992) School psychologists' job satisfaction:

ten years later. Doctoral dissertation,

Virginia Polytechnic and State University, Blacksburg, VA. Brown, M., Hohenshil, T.H., &

Brown, D. (1998). School Psychologists' job satisfaction in the

USA: A national study. School Psychology International Journal, 19(1), 79-89.

Bruce, W.M. & Blackburn, J.W. (1992). Balancing job satisfaction and performance: A guide

for human resource professionals. Westport, Conn.: Quorum Books, 4-23. Bowling Green

State University. The Job Descriptive Index (JDI; Copyright 1985, 1997,)

Bowling Green State University). Retrieved from the World Wide Web on December 1, 2002

from http://www.bgsu.edu/departments/psych/JDI/.

Brush, D.H., Moch, M.K., & Pooyan, A. (1987). Individual demographic differences and job

satisfaction. Journal of Occupational Behavior, 8, 139-155.

Cappelli, P. (2000). Managing without commitment. Organizational Dynamics, 28(4), 11-24.

 77

References

Chapman, D. & Lowther, M. (1982). Teachers' satisfaction with teaching. Journal of Education

Research, 75, (4), 241-247.

Curtis, M.J., Hundley, S.A., Walker, K.J. & Baker, A.C. (1999). Demographic characteristics and

professional practices in school psychology. School Psychology Review, 28, 104116.

Curtis, M. J., Abshier, D. W., Sutton, N. T., Grier, J. E. Chesno, & Hunley, S. A. (2002). School

psychology: turning the corner into the twenty-first century. NASP Communique, Vol. 30, #8.

Cutts, N. E. (1955). School psychologists at mid-century. Washington, D.C.: American

Psychological Association. D'Arcy, C., Syrotuik, J., & Siddique, C. M. (1984).

Perceived job attributes, job

satisfaction and psychological distress: A comparison of working men and women.

Human Relations, 37(8), 603-611. DeMeuse, K. P. (1985). A compendium of frequently used

measures in industrial/organizational

psychology. The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist, 23, 53-59.

Derlin, R., & Schneider, G. T. (1994). Understanding job satisfaction: Principals and teachers,

urban and suburban. Urban Education, 29 (1), 63-68. Dodd-McCue, D., & Wright, G. B.

(1996). Men, women, and attitudinal commitment: The

effects of workplace experiences and socialization. Human Relations, 49, 1065-1089. Dwyer, K.

P. & Gorin, S., (1996). A national perspective of school psychology in the context of

school reform. School Psychology Review . 25 (4). 507-511. Dyer, L., & Theriault, R.

(1976). The determinants of pay satisfaction. Journal of Applied

Psychology, 61, 596-604. Ehly, S. & Reimers, T. M. (1986). Perceptions of job satisfaction, job

stability, and quality of

professional life among rural and urban school psychologists. Psychology in the Schools;

v23 n2 p164-70. (Eric Document Reproduction Service No. # EJ335638). Ewen, R. B. (1967).

Weighing components of job satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology,

51, (1), 68-73.

 78

Facundo, M. (1999, Sept. 14). Bullies: A serious problem. The New Herald, p. 1C-2C. Fagan,T. & Bose,

J. (2002). NASP: A Profile of the 1990s. NASP Communique Vol. 29, #2.

Retrieved from the World Wide Web on September 21, 2002 from

http://www.nasponline.org/publications.

Fein, L.G. (1974). The changing school scene: Challenge to psychology. New York: John Wiley & Sons,

Inc.

Finley, W. H. (1991). High school principal job satisfaction. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,

Memphis State University, Memphis, Tennessee. Fisher, G.L., Jenkins, S.J. &

Crumbley, J.D. (1986). A replication of a survey of school

psychologists: Congruence between training, practice, preferred role, and competence.

Psychology in the Schools, 23, 271-279. Fournet, G. P., Distefano, M. K., & Pryer, M. W. (1969).

Job satisfaction: Issues and problems.

Personnel Psychology, 19, 165-183. Green, J. (2000). Job satisfaction of community college

chairpersons. Unpublished doctoral

dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic and State University, Blacksburg, VA.

Gruneberg, M. M. (1979). Understanding job satisfaction. New York: Macmillan.

Herzberg, F. (1966). Work and the nature of man. Cleveland,: World Publishing.

Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., Peterson, R., & Capwell, D. (1957). Job attitudes:

Review of research and opinion. Pittsburgh: Psychological Services of Pittsburgh. Hoppock,

R. (1935). Job Satisfaction. New York: Harper Brothers.

House, R.J., & Mitchell, T.R. (1974). Path-goal theory of Journal of Contemporary Business,

leadership. Journal of Contemporary Business. 3, 81-97. Howell, D.C. (1997). Statistical

methods for psychology. (4th ed.). New York: Duxbury Press. Huberty, T.J., & Huebner, E.S. (1988). A

national survey of burnout of school psychologists.

Psychology in the Schools, 25, 54-61. Hughes, J.N. (1982). Manpower needs in rural school

psychology. Virginia Association of

School Psychologists Newsletter, 14, 4-5. In Brown, M. (1992) School psychologists' job
 79

References

satisfaction: ten years later. Doctoral dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic and State

University, Blacksburg, VA. Hulin, C. L. (1963). A linear model of job satisfaction. Authorized

facsimile of an unpublished

doctoral dissertation (Cornell University, Ithaca, NY,1963) Ann Arbor, MI: University

Microfilms Limited.
Hulin, C. L., & Smith, P. C. (1965). A linear model of job satisfaction. Journal of Applied

Psychology, 49, (3), 209-216.

Iiacqua, J. A., Schumacher, P., & Li, H. C. (1995). Factors contributing to job satisfaction

in higher education. Education, 116(1), 51-61. Jerrell, J.M. (1984). Boundary-spanning functions

served by the rural psychologists. Journal of

School Psychology, 15, 75-80. Jewell, Linda (1990). Contemporary industrial/organizational

psychology. St. Paul; West. Jorde, P. (1982). Avoiding burnout in early childhood education.

Washington, D.C.: Acropolis Kanungo, R. (1982). Work alienation. New York: Pradeger Publishers.

Keith, P.B., Brown, M.B., & Oberman, M.A. (1992). School psychologists' use of time and

effectiveness. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association of

School Psychologists. Nashville, TN. Kendrick, R., Chandler, J., & Hatcher, W. (1994). Job

demands, stressors, and the school

counselor. The School Counselor, 41, 365-369. Kirk, D. (1988). Job satisfaction

among elementary school counselors in Virginia.

Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University,

Blacksburg, VA.

Kirkman, B. L., & Rosen, B. (1999). Beyond self-management: Antecedents and consequences of team

empowerment. Academy of Management Journal, 42(1), 58-74.

Kramen-Kahn, B. & Hansen, N.D. (1998). Rafting the rapids: Occupational hazards, rewards, and coping

strategies of psychotherapists. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 29 (2), 130-134.

Landy, F. J. , & Trumbo, D.A. (1980). Psychology of Work Behavior. Pacific Grove, CA:

Brooks/Cole.
 80

Lawler, E.E. (1971). Pay and organizations effectiveness. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Lee, R., & Wilbur, E. R. (1985). Age, education, job tenure, salary, job characteristics, and job

satisfaction: A multivariate analysis. Human Relations, 38, 781-791. Levine, D.I. (1995).

Reinventing the workplace: How business and employees can both win.

Washington: The Brookings Institution. Levinson, E. M.(1983). Job satisfaction among school

psychologists in the Commonwealth of

Virginia. Dissertation Abstracts International, 45, 05, DA 8415961. Levinson, E. M.

(1989). Job satisfaction among school psychologists: A replication study.

Psychological Reports, 65, 579-584. Levinson, E. M. (1993). Transdisciplinary vocational

assessment: Issues in school-based

programs. Brandon, Vermont: Clinical Psychology Publishing Co., Inc. Levinson, E.

M. & Dematteo, F.J.(1998). Stress, burnout and dissatisfaction in school

psychology. Presentation on March 26, 1998 in Harrisburg, PA. Retrieved from the

World Wide Web on March 3, 2004 from www. coe.iup.edu/emlevins/aspp2/sld001.htm.

Levinson, E. M., Fetchkan, R., & Hohenshil, T. H. (1988) Job Satisfaction among practicing

school psychologists. School Psychology Review, 17, 101-112. Levinson, E.

M. & Hohenshil, T. H. (1987) Job Satisfaction among American

school psychologists. School Psychology International, 8, 149-151.

Locke, E. (1976). The nature and causes of job satisfaction. In Dunnette, M.D. Handbook of

Industrial and Organizational Psychology. Chicago: Rand McNally. Locke, E. (1969). What is

job satisfaction? Organizational Behavior and Human Performance,

4, 309-336.

Locke, E. A., Fitzpatrick, W., & White, F. M. (1983). Job satisfaction and role clarity

among university and college faculty. The Review of Higher Education, 6(4), 343-365. Lofquist,

L. & Dawis, R. (1991). Essentials of person environment correspondence counseling.

Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press. Lowry, R. (1998). Role and functions of school

psychologists in Virginia: A ten year follow-up.

 81

References

Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic and State University,

Blacksburg, VA.

Lucas, G.H., Babakus, E. & Ingram, T.N. (1990). An empirical test of job satisfaction turnover

relationship: assessing the role of job performance of retail managers. Journal of the Academy of

Marketing Science, 18, 199-208.

Lund, A.R., Reschly, D.J. & Martin, L.M. (1998). School psychology personnel needs:

Correlates of current patterns and historical trends. School Psychology Review. 27 (4).

106-120.

Martin, U., & Schinke, S. P. (1998). Organizational and individual factors influencing job

satisfaction and burnout of mental health workers. Social Work in Health Care, 28, (2), 51-

62.

Martinez-Ponz, M. (1990). Test of a three-factor model of teacher commitment. Paper presented at the

annual conference of the New England Educational Research Organization, Maine.

Maynard, M. (1986). Measuring work and support network satisfaction. Journal of Employment

Counseling, 23, 9-19.

Merchant, C. (1983). An investigation of the practice of School Psychology in Virginia.

Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia. Merriam

Webster Inc. (1986). Webster's Third New International Dictionary of the English

Language-Unabridged. Merriam Webster Inc, Springfield, MA. Milkovich, G. T., & Newman, J.

M. (1990). Compensation. Homewood, IL: BPI Irwin. Miller, N. J. (1985). A description of secondary

school principals in Minnesota and their job

satisfaction. An authorized facsimile of an unpublished doctoral dissertation (University

of North Dakota, Grand Forks, 1985), Ann Arbor, MI: University Microfilms

International. In Waskiewicz, S.P. (1999). Variables that contribute to job satisfaction of

secondary school principals. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic and

State University, Blacksburg, VA. Murray, L. (1995). Job satisfaction among elementary school

counselors in Virginia: Seven

 82

years later. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State

University, Blacksburg, VA. National Association of School Psychologists. (2004) Retrieved

from the World Wide Web on

4-19-04 from http://www.nasponline.org/about_nasp/whatisa.html

National Association of School Psychologists. (2003). Retrieved from the World Wide Web on

January 7, 2003 from http://www.nasponline.org. O'Day, J. (1998). School Psychologists as Mental

Health Providers. NASP Communique, Volume 28, No. 7. Retrieved from the World Wide Web on

January 9, 2003 from http://www.nasponline.org/publications/cq287Mental.html

O'Driscoll, M. P., & Randall, D. M. (1999). Perceived organisational support, satisfaction with

rewards, and employee job involvement and organisational commitment. Applied

Psychology: An International Review, 48, (2), 197-209. Pedhazur, E. J., &

Schmelkin, L. P. (1991). Measurement, design and analysis:

An integrated approach. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Ponec, D. L., &

Brock, B. L. (2000). Relationship among elementary school counselors and

principals: A unique bond. Professional School Counseling, 3, (3), 208-217. Quarstein, V. A.,

McAfee, R. B., & Glassman, M. (1992). The situational occurrences theory of

job satisfaction. Human Relations, 45, (8), 859-873. Quinn, R. P., Staines, G. L., & McCullough,

M. R. (1974). Job satisfaction: Is there a

trend? Manpower Research Monograph No. 30, U.S. Department of Labor. Washington,

DC: Government Printing Office. Reiner, H.D., & Hartshorene, T.S. (1982). Job burnout and the

school psychologist. Psychology

in the Schools, 19, 508-512. Reschly, D. J. (2000). The present and future status of

school psychology in the United

States. School Psychology Review . 29 (4). 507-522. Reschly, D. J. & Wilson, M. S. (1995).

School psychology practitioners and faculty: 1986 to

1991-92 trends in demographics, roles, satisfaction, and system reform. School

Psychology Review . 24 (1). 62-80.

 83

References

Reyes, P.; Madsen, J.; & Taylor, B. (1989). Organizational incentives, teacher commitment,

morale, and job satisfaction: Is the program achieving its goals? Paper presented at the annual

meeting of American Education Research Association, San Francisco, CA.

Rhodes, S. R. (1983). Age-related differences in work attitudes and behavior: A review and

conceptual analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 93, (2), 328-367. Schroffel, A. (1999). How does

clinical supervision affect job satisfaction? The Clinical

Supervisor, 18, (2), 91-105. Schultz, D. (1982). Psychology and Industry Today. New York:

MacMillian Company. Siegal, L & Lane, I. (1982). Personnel and organizational psychology.

Homewood, IL:Richard

D. Irwin, Inc.

Smith, D.K. (1984). Practicing school psychologists: their characteristics, activities, and

populations served. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 15, 790-810. Smith, P. C.,

Kendall, L. M., & Hulin, C. L. (1969). The measurement of satisfaction in

work and retirement. Chicago: Rand McNally. Smith, P. L., Smits, S. J., & Hoy,

F. (1998). Employee work attitudes: The subtle

influence of gender. Human Relations, 51(5), 649-666. Solly, D. C. (1983). An analysis of job

satisfaction of school psychologists practicing in West

Virginia. Dissertation Abstracts International, 45, DA 8409714. Solly, D. C., & Hohenshil, T. H.

(1986). Job satisfaction of school psychologists in a primarily

rural state. School Psychology Review, 15 (1), 119-126. South, P.H. (1990). Test of a model of

job satisfaction for North Carolina school psychologists.

Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic and State University,

Blacksburg, VA.

Spector, P. E. (1997). Job satisfaction Survey, JSS. Retrieved from the World Wide Web on November

30, 2002 from http://chuma.cas.usf.edu/~spector/scales/jssovr.html .

Spector, P. E. (1997). Job satisfaction: Application, assessment, causes, and consequences.

 84

Thousand Oaks, CA.: Sage. Stewart, G. L. (2000). Meta-analysis of work teams research

published between 1977 and 1998.

Paper presented at the Academy of Management Annual Meeting 2000, Toronto. Sutter, M. R.

(1994). Job and career satisfaction of secondary school assistant

principals. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Kent State University, Kent, Ohio. Tatsapaugh, L.

(1994). Increasing job satisfaction of therapeutic camp counselors through the

use of individual staff development plans. (Eric Document Reproduction Service No. #

ED387732).

Taylor, F. (1911). Principals of Scientific Management. New York: Harper & Brothers.

Thomas, K. W., & Tymon, W. G. J. (1997). Bridging the motivation gap in total quality. Quality

Management Journal, 4(2), 80-96.

Thompson, D., & McNamara, J. (1997). Job satisfaction in educational organizations: A synthesis of

research findings. Educational Administration Quarterly, 33(1), 1-31.

Valentine, S., Valentine, W. R., & Dick, J. (1998). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivators and older employees'

attitudes towards their current jobs. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 87, 407410.

Vocational Psychology Research, (2002). Retrieved from the World Wide Web on

December 2, 2002 from http://www.psych.umn.edu/psylabs/vpr/default.htm. Vroom,

V. H. (1964). Work and motivation. New York: Wiley.

Vroom, V. H. (1982). Work and motivation (Rev. ed.). Malabar, FL: Robert E. Krieger

Publishing Company.

Wanous, J. P., & Lawler, E. E. (1972). Measurement and meaning of job satisfaction. Journal of

Applied Psychology, 56, (2), 95-105. Weaver, C. (1977). Relationships among pay,

race, sex, and job satisfaction. Personnel

Psychology, 26, 545-557. Weaver, C. (1980). Job Satisfaction in the United States in the

1970's. Journal of Applied

Psychology, 65, 364-367.

Weiss, D. J., Dawis, R. V., England, G. W., & Lofquist, L. H. (1967). Manual for the Minnesota
 85

References

Satisfaction Questionnaire. Minneapolis, MN: The University of Minnesota Press. Wexley,

K. & Yukl, G. (1984). Organizational Behavior and Personnel Psychology.

Homewood, IL: Richard D. Irwin. Wright, D. & Gutkin, T.G. (1981). school psychologists'

job satisfaction and discrepancies

between actual and desired work function. Psychological Reports, 49, 735-738. Zedeck, S. (1987,

October). Satisfaction in union members and their spouses. Paper presented at

the Job Satisfaction: Advances in Research and Practice Conference, Bowling Green,

Ohio.

Zeitz, G. (1990). Age and work satisfaction in a government agency: A situational

perspective. Human Relations, 43(5), 419-438.

Zins, J.E., Murphy, J.J., & Wess, B.P. (1989). Supervision in school psychology: Current

practices and congruence with professional standards. School Psychology Review, 18, 5663.
 86

APPENDIX

A SURVEY

LETTERS
 87

Dear NASP Member:

We are writing to urge your participation a study being completed by Travis Worrell, a doctoral
candidate in the doctoral program at Virginia Tech.

The study is designed to determine the degree of job satisfaction of school psychologists.
Additionally, the study will compare the current level of job satisfaction with the levels of job
satisfaction of school psychologists ten and twenty years ago. It is an exciting study that will provide
both current and longitudinal information that will be disseminated both to practitioners and to training
programs.

In the next week you will receive a copy of the survey materials. We hope that you will assist
Travis Worrell and the profession of school psychology by taking the 15-20 minutes necessary to
complete the survey and return the materials. His study will generate valuable data to assist in the future
development of the school psychology profession.

Thomas H. Hohenshil Professor and

Dissertation Chair
Michael B. Brown Associate Professor East
Carolina University Dissertation Committee
Member
 88

Dear NASP Member:

October 29, 2003

As a school psychologist working on my dissertation in the Virginia Tech Doctoral

Program, I am asking for your help in collecting data for a national study of school psychologists'
job satisfaction.

Enclosed with this letter is an information form and a questionnaire regarding your satisfaction
with your job. The materials I am asking you to complete will require about 15-20 minutes of your time.

This study is directed primarily toward practitioners. Those of you who are administrators,
faculty, or students should complete all of the questions that pertain to you. Your response is necessary to
aid in follow up activities.

Practitioners and others who complete the materials are urged to do so as soon as possible and
before November 21, 2003. All information will be kept confidential. You will not, at any time, be
identified with your responses. The number which appears on the forms is used only to keep materials
together and aid in follow up. Only group scores will be reported.

Thank you in advance for your assistance. The success of this study depends on your
help.

Sincerely,

Travis G. Worrell School

Psychologist Doctoral
Candidate
By this time you should have received all of the survey materials for the national job satisfaction survey.
If you have already completed and returned the survey, please accept my sincere thanks. If not, please
take a few moments to complete the survey and return it as soon as possible but before December 15. If
you are still missing the materials please call collect at 276-632-8439 or email me at
tworrell@adelphia.net and I will mail you another packet immediately.

This study would not be possible without your assistance. Thank you again for your timely assistance.

Travis G. Worrell
January 3, 2004

Dear NASP Member:

I am writing to follow-up my national survey of school psychologists' job satisfaction. To date,

more than 45% of your fellow school psychologists have returned their completed survey materials.

My records indicate that you have not yet responded to my request for information. Perhaps
you have misplaced the materials, or have put them aside to complete at a less busy time. Won't you
please take a few minutes to complete the materials? I have enclosed a duplicate set of materials in
case you misplaced the first set.
 89

Dear NASP Member:

Your individual response, while confidential, is essential to the success of my study.
Representativeness and validity of my results depend on the largest possible response rate. Please respond
by January 13. I look forward to your response.

Sincerely,

Travis G. Worrell
School Psychologist
Doctoral Candidate

P.S. If you have already responded to my request, please disregard this letter and accept my
thanks for your help.
February 4, 2004

Dear Colleague:

Several months ago 500 NASP members in the United States were asked to participate in a study
conducted by Travis Worrell. The response has been tremendous, with over 57% having responded by
completing and returning the survey materials.

According to Travis' records, he has not yet received your completed materials. Since we want the highest
possible rate of participation, I will appreciate very much if you will assist Travis with his study. Your
responses are vital to his findings. The results are intended to provide information on school
psychologists' job satisfaction across the nation. All individual responses will be held in strictest
confidence.

Enclosed are duplicate survey forms and a stamped self-addressed envelope. Won't you please take a few
minutes to complete and forward the information to Travis?

Thank you for your help.

Sincerely,

Thomas H. Hohenshil Professor and

Dissertation Chair
 90

O
 Ill

11.
 92

DATA No.
FORM
The
followin
g is
needed
from all
NASP
member
s
cooperat
ing with
this
study.

l. p
W s
ha y
t c
is h
yo o
ur l
pri o
m g
ar i
y s
rol t
e s
de _
si _
gn _
ati
on P
? r
___ i
Practiv
tionera
emplot
yed e
by
P
public
r
schoo
a
ls ___
c
Super
t
visor/
i
Admi
t
nistrati
or o
________
n
Studee
nt r
(Full-
time)_
_
________
Intern_
(Full-
time)O
t
____ h
Tr e
ai r
ne
r (
of p
sc l
ho e
ol a
 Ill

s c
e i e
s f
p y i?
e )
sWhat is Female
2W your
current
. h degree
ystatus?
a ____BA.
oor B.S
3t ____
uMasters
. plus 30
r semeste
i r or (45
quarter)
4s hours
a____
.
Masters
g
y ____
Ed.S.
o Doctor
ate
u
5How
r . many
school
psychol
ogists
s are
employ
e ed by
your
x school
system
? ?
_
_
_
_ _

11.
 94

_
6 What is the _
. approximate _
psychologist _
to student
ratio in your
system?
____ 1
1: :
1
0
0
0
o
r
le
ss
_______________________
1:
2
0
0
0
to
1:
2
5
0
0
_
_
_
l:
l0
0
0
to
l:
l5
0
0
_
_
_
l:
2
5
0
0
to
l:
3
0
0
0
____
1:
1
5
0
0
to
1:
2
0
0
0 __
 Ill

7. spe
P nd
l wor
e king
a with
s in
e eac
e h
s area
t liste
i d
m belo
a w:
t ___
e Psyc
t hoed
h ucati
e onal
a asse
p ssme
p nt
r and
o repo
x rt
i writi
m ng
a ___
t Mult
e idisc
n iplin
u ary
m team
b meet
e ings
r (plac
o eme
f nt,
h revie
o w,
u etc.)
r _______
s Dire
d ct
u inter
r venti
i on
n (indi
g vidu
al or
a grou
n p
coun
a selin
v g of
e stud
r ents
a or
g pare
e nts)
w ___
e Indir
e ect
k inter
venti
y on
o (dev
u elopi
ng

11.
 96

p velo
r pme
o nt
g activ
r ities
a ___
m Adm
s inist
i rativ
m e
p dutie
l s
e ___
m Net
e wor
n king
t or
e inter
d actin
g
b with
y othe
r
o com
t mun
h ity
e agen
r cies
s (pub
, lic
t relat
e ions,
a prov
c idin
h g or
e exch
r angi
c ng
o infor
n mati
s on,
u com
l mun
t ity
a task
t forc
i es,
o inter
n agen
) cy
_ prog
_ ram
_ deve
lop
P ment
r ,
o etc.)
f
e 8How
s Rural Urban
s . would
i you
o describ
n e the
a commu
l nity
d which
e your
 Ill

s ol district is 2 ,000 ____

c in? 6 0346,0
h Suburba , 0301 to
o n 0 2348,0
0 4300 ____
9 Is your 0 6
. immediate No
supervisor a 3 71,0
certified 6 00
school , and
psychologist 0 over
? 0
Yes 1
10.Please t
check your o
annual
salary. 3
____ 2 ____ 8
1 0 24,001 ,
4, , to 0
0 0 ____ 0
0 0 26,001 0
0 1 to
or ____ 4
le t 28,001 8
ss o to ,
____ ____ 0
1 2 30,001 0
4, 2 to 1
0 ,
0 0 ____ t
1 0 32,001 o
to 0 to
1 ____ 5
6, _ 34,001 0
0 _ to ,
0 _ 0
0 0
2
____ 2 0
1 , 2
6, 0 8
0 0 Wha
0 1 t is
1 your
to t curr
1 o ent
8, cont
0 2 ract
0 4 lengt
0 , h?
____ 0 9 1
1 0 2
8, 0 PLEASE CONTINUE
0
12.
2 13. 14. 15. H
16. 17. 18. 19.
____years
0
1 H
to 2 I ____years
22 W
2
0, A ____yes
1 A
0
0 D ____yes
. D
0
_ D ___yes
_
_ ____yes
2
____yes

11.
 98

Mriti
- ng r o
I syst D
Vem D
s D n
i for _______________
nyou yes
r
t sch
hool n
erep
i orts o
r?
___
wyes
o n
r ______________________________________________________________
k yes o
D
io
n
y n
to
hu o
e
u
ss
ce n
h
oc o
ou
lr
sr
?i n
c
Du o
ol
u
ym n
o
ub o
a
_ S
us
_ a
se
ed

ca
os
ms
pe
us
ts
em
re
in
zt
e
dp
r
o
r
c
e
e
p
d
o
u
rr
te
ws
 99

APPENDIX C

MODIFIED MINNESOTA SATISFACTION QUESTIONNAIRE

 100

Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire Instructions

The purpose of this questionnaire is to give you a chance to tell how you feel about your present job, what
things are satisfied with, and what things you are not satisfied with. On the basis of your answers and those of other
school psychologists throughout the nation, we hope to get a better understanding of the things individuals like and
dislike about their jobs.

On the following page, you will find statements about your present job. Please read each statement
carefully, and decide how satisfied you are with that aspect of your job. Keeping the statement in mind:

_ If you feel the job gives you more than you expected, check the blank under "VS" (Very Satisfied)
_ If you feel the job gives you what you expected, check the blank under "S" (Satisfied) _ If you feel
the job gives you less than what you expected, check the blank under "DS" (Dissatisfied)
_ If you feel the job gives you much less than what you expected, check the blank under "VDS"
(Very Dissatisfied)

* Keep the statement in mind when you decide how satisfied you feel with that aspect of your job.
* Please do this for all statements, and please answer every item.

• Be frank and honest. Give a true picture of your feelings about your present job.
Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire

Ask yourself: How satisfied am I with this aspect of my job? No.

VS means I am very satisfied with this aspect of my job.

S means I am satisfied with this aspect of my job.
DS means I am dissatisfied with this aspect of my job.
VDS means I am very dissatisfied with this aspect of my job.
On my present job, this is how I feel about..... VDS DS S VS

1. 39.
2. 40.
3. 41.
4. 42.
5. 43.
6. 44.
7. 45.
8. 46.
9. 47.
10. 48.
11. 49.
12. 50.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
 101

The chance toMy job security..............................................................................................

be of serviceThe amount of pay for the work I do..............................................................
to others.........................................................................................................
The physical working conditions (heating, lighting, etc) in the position........
The chance toThe opportunities for advancement in this position.......................................
try out some The technical "know how" of my supervisor................................................
of my ownThe spirit of cooperation among my co-workers...........................................
ideas................................................................................................................
The chance to be responsible planning my work...........................................
Being able to The way I am noticed when I do a good job..................................................
do the jobBeing able to see the results of the job I do...................................................
without The chance to be active most of the time......................................................
feeling it is The chance to be of service to people...........................................................
morally wrong................................................................................................
The chance to do new and original things on my own.................................
The chance toThe chance to work alone on the job............................................................
work byBeing able to do things that don't go against my religious beliefs.................
myself.............................................................................................................
The chance to do different things from time to time....................................
The variety in The chance to tell other staff members how to do things.............................
my work.........................................................................................................
The chance to do work that is well suited to my abilities..............................
The chance toThe chance to be "somebody" in the community................................
have othersSchool system policies and the way in which they are administered.............
look to me for The way my supervisor handles employees..................................................
direction........................................................................................................
The way my job provides for a secure future.................................................
The chance toThe chance to make as much money as my friends.......................................
do the kind ofThe physical surroundings where I work......................................................
work that I do The chance for getting ahead in this position.................................................
best................................................................................................................
The competence of my supervisor in making decisions.................................
The socialThe chance to develop close friendships with my peers................................
position in the The chance to make decisions on my own..................................................
community The way I get full credit for the work I do....................................................
that goes with Being able to take pride in a job well done....................................................
the job.............................................................................................................
Being able to do something much of the time................................................
The policiesThe chance to help others..............................................................................
and practicesThe chance to try something different...........................................................
toward Being able to do things that don't go against my conscience.........................
employees ofThe chance to be alone on the job.................................................................
this schoolThe routine in my work................................................................................
system............................................................................................................
The chance to supervise other people............................................................
The way my The chance to make use of my best abilities.................................................
supervisor andThe chance to "rub elbows" with important people......................................
I understandThe way employees are informed about school policies...............................
each other.......................................................................................................
The way my supervisor backs employees up with the administration...........
PLEASE CONTINUE ON BACK
Ask yourself: How satisfied am I with this aspect of my job? No.

VS means I am very satisfied with this aspect of my job.

S means I am satisfied with this aspect of my job.
DS means I am dissatisfied with this aspect of my job.
VDS means I am very dissatisfied with this aspect of my job.
On my present job, this is how I feel about..... VDS DS S VS

51. The way my job provides for steady employment............................................ _____ ____ ____ ____
52. How my pay compares with that for similar positions in other school systems.. ____ ____ ____ ____
53. The pleasantness of the working conditions...................................................... _____ ____ ____ ____
54. The way promotions are given out in this position........................................... _____ ____ ____ ____
55. The way my supervisor delegates work to staff members................................. _____ ____ ____ ____
56. The friendliness of my co-workers.................................................................... _____ ____ ____ ____
57. The chance to be responsible for the work of others........................................ _____ ____ ____ ____
58. The recognition I get for the work I do............................................................ _____ ____ ____ ____
59. Being able to do something worthwhile........................................................... _____ ____ ____ ____
60. Being able to stay busy.................................................................................... ______ ____ ____ ____
61. The chance to do things for other people........................................................ ______ ____ ____ ____
62. The chance to develop new and better ways to do the job.............................. ______ ____ ____ ____
63. The chance to do things that don't harm other people....................................... _____ ____ ____ ____
64. The chance to work independently of others................................................... _____ ____ ____ ____
65. The chance to do something different every day.............................................. _____ ____ ____ ____
66. The chance to tell people what to do................................................................ _____ ____ ____ ____
67. The chance to do something that makes use of my abilities.............................. ____ ____ ____ ____
68. The chance to be important in the eyes of others.............................................. _____ ____ ____ ____
69. The way the school system policies are put into practices................................ _____ ____ ____ ____
70. The way my supervisor takes care of complaints brought up by employees.... ______ ____ ____ ____
71. How steady my job is...................................................................................... _____ ____ ____ ____
72. My pay and the amount of work I do............................................................... _____ ____ ____ ____
 102

73. The physical conditions of the job.................................................................... _____ ____ ____ ____
74. The chances for advancement in the position................................................... _____ ____ ____ ____
75. The way my supervisor provides help on hard problems.................................. _____ ____ ____ ____
76. The way my co-workers are easy to make friends with..................................... _____ ____ ____ ____
77. The freedom to use my own judgment.............................................................. _____ ____ ____ ____
78. The way they usually tell me when I do my job well........................................ _____ ____ ____ ____
79. The chance to do my best at all times............................................................... _____ ____ ____ ____
80. The chance to be "on the go" all of the time..................................................... _____ ____ ____ ____
81. The chance to be of some small service to other people.................................... _____ ____ ____ ____
82. The chance to try my own methods of doing the job........................................ _____ ____ ____ ____
83. The chance to do the job without feeling I am cheating someone..................... _____ ____ ____ ____
84. The chance to work away from others.............................................................. _____ ____ ____ ____
85. The chance to do many different things on the job........................................... _____ ____ ____ ____
86. The chance to tell others what to do................................................................ ______ ____ ____ ____
87. The chance to make use of my abilities and skills........................................... _____ ____ ____ ____
88. The chance to have a definite place in the community................................... ______ ____ ____ ____
89. The way the school system treats its employees.............................................. _____ ____ ____ ____
90. The personal relationship between my supervisor and his/her employees........ _____ ____ ____ ____
91. The way that layoffs and transfers are avoided in my job................................. _____ ____ ____ ____
92. How my pay compares with that of other school psychologists..................... ______ ____ ____ ____
93. The working conditions................................................................................... ______ ____ ____ ____
94. My chances for advancement......................................................................... ______ ____ ____ ____
95. The way my supervisor trains employees....................................................... ______ ____ ____ ____
96. The way my co-workers get along with each other........................................ ______ ____ ____ ____
97. The responsibility of my job........................................................................... ______ ____ ____ ____
98. The praise I get for doing a good job.............................................................. ______ ____ ____ ____
99. The feeling of accomplishment I get from the job.......................................... ______ ____ ____ ____
100. Being able to keep busy all of the time........................................................... ______ ____ ____ ____

END OF SURVEY

VITA

Travis Gleason Worrell was born in Winston-Salem, North Carolina on May 2, 1972. He was the

second born child of Mr. and Mrs. Gleason H. Worrell. He attended public schools in both Forsyth

County, NC and Henry County, VA. He graduated from Magna Vista High School in 1990. He then

attended Radford University for seven years, earning a Bachelor of Science in Psychology in 1993, a

Master of Science in school psychology in 1996, and an Educational Specialist Degree in 1997.

The author completed his school psychology internship in the Martinsville City Public Schools,

where he was hired on as a full-time school psychologist. He has been employed as a school psychologist

in Martinsville from July 1997 to the present time. In 1998, Travis entered the Virginia Polytechnic

Institute and State University Doctoral Training Program in Counselor Education. He is married to

Cynthia Renee Worrell, his high school sweetheart and devoted wife since 1994.